From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.
From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.] From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 1 13:32:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:32:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] fear of death In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201001203240.GA7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 07:02:34PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Sheldon Solomon - "I feel like there's a real sense in which doing > these studies and writing books and lecturing has been my way of avoiding > directly confronting my anxieties by turning it (me - fear of death) > into an intellectual exercise" [Me - sounds like it could've been said > by R'Chaim] > Is this a common approach in orthodox circles I prefer the dialog version of the Mesilas Yesharim, even though the chapter version that is more widely available was the Ramchal's final choice. In the dialog version, the ideas are framed as a discussion by two friends who meet after a very long absence -- the Chakham and the Chassid. The Chakham shares my habit of not dealing with the emotions or applicability of ideas by analyzing them to depth in the abstact. It's much easier to analyze what yir'ah means in relation to pachad and eimah, or yir'as hacheit vs yir'as haromemus vs yir'as ha'onesh, or whether there is a difference in connotation between yir'as Shamayim and yir'as Hashem. Much easier than it is to spend time actually trying to become more of a yarei Shamayim. And I think I am far from alone in falling into that trap. Is that related enough to what you're asking for our opinions about? 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 Oct 1 13:57:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 16:57:19 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:37:44PM +0100, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > I suppose the reason it seems to me obvious that mishum simcha, means the > simcha of Yom Tov, is because: > > a) when the poskim say something is meshum simcha in the context of yom tov, > they mean the mitzvah of simcha ... This is the crux of our difference in understanding. You're using a general rule about "mishum simchah" in texts about hilkhos YT. I'm using the se'if's first mention of simchah, or at least "semeichin", as the context by which I understood all further mentions of simchah. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made between an > avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing hakafos on simchas > Torah. But if they have completely different bases, then that discussion > would need to be had. OTOH, if simchas YT were the reason for all of the minhagim of Simchas Torah, why aren't we dancing with the Torah on all chagim? Or at least on Zeman Matan Toraseinu? You see hakafos with the lulav as mishum simchah to begin with? "Anah H' hoshia na?" I think I just don't understand what you're trying to say. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema refers to > cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as the heterim were > in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, historically, which > again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. Huh? The universality of finishing veZos haBerakhah on Shemini Atzeres, Yom Tov sheini if you're in chu"l was WELL before minhagim about hakafos with the Torah, never mind hakafos at night, giving all the men aliyos, and then also the older boys, hakafos at night, leining at night (where applicable)... Again, I must not be understanding what you're trying to say. > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in Orech > Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: "And also we > are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, and even though it > is not correct in any event because of the joy of the siyum they do so ." - > whereas I would have thought he should say the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch > HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. Possibly the source of my first impression, via AhS Yomi. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... Whenever people talk about "the ground", they mean on planet earth. Pretty solid general rule. But if someone starts a paragraph by saying "When Neal Armstrong left footprints on the ground of the moon..." What would you assume "the ground" refers to in the rest of the paragraph? 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 Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Thu Oct 1 17:24:23 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 01:24:23 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> References: <001801d69015$c055a6c0$4100f440$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200922212323.GE19252@aishdas.org> <004301d6912f$40d464c0$c27d2e40$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20200923181836.GA16347@aishdas.org> <000001d691fa$285fd930$791f8b90$@kolsassoon.org.uk> <20201001205719.GB7178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <005901d69852$61cca4b0$2565ee10$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RMB writes: <> Not only a general rule about mishum simcha in texts about hilkhos YT, but when used specifically about a set of festivals described in all of our tefilot as "zman simchasainu". Why do you think that particular accolade was instituted davka about Sukkos/Simchas Torah, by the anshei Knesset hagedola ? <> I understand that, but in the context of a discussion about what we do on zman simchaseinu, which comprises a list of customs for that zman, understanding that the use of semeichin in the first line as being what drives the whole passage, including the language "and all is mishum simcha" appears to be ignoring the wider context. ... > b) I have not seen (and don't expect to see) a distinction made > between an avel doing hakafos with the lulav, and an avel doing > hakafos on simchas Torah. But if they have completely different > bases, then that discussion would need to be had. <> Because, as many meforshim point out, the psukim specifically speak of three times the amount of simcha for Sukkos - here it is from the midrash agada: ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ????, ?????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?' ????? (???? ??) ???? ???? ???? ?????, ????? ????? ???? (???? ??), ????? ?? ???. ??? ?????? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ??????, ????? ?? ????? ?????, ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ????? ????? ??? ??? ???' (????? ?? ??), ???? ??????? ?? ????, ?? ??? ??? ??? ????? ?????? ?? ?????, ??? ??? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??? ??? ???, ??? ???? ?? ???? ???, ??? ???? ???? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ?????: "Why does it not say regarding Pesach simcha, and with Shavuos, there is written [only] one simcha, ?and you shall be happy before Hashem Your G-d (pasuk 11), and on Sukkos it is written three times simcha, that it is written you shall be happy on your festival (pasuk 14), and you shall be only happy [pasuk 15]. Because we are taught that on three periods in the year the world is judged, on Pesach on the grain, on Shavuos on the fruit of the tree, and on Rosh HaShana all the world passes before him like a flock of sheep, as it says ?He who forms their hearts together etc? [Tehillim 33:15] and on Chag we are judged on the water, that the time of Pesach there is a lack, that there is still what to do, and so it does not write simcha, but on Shavuos one judgment has passed, and therefore we say one simcha, and on Chag that has passed three judgments, Pesach, Shavuos and Rosh HaShana there we say on it three simchos." And here it is from the Da'as HaZakeinim: ??? ????? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ?? ???? ?? (??) ????? ?? ???. ??? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????. ????? ????. ?? ???. ????? ???? ?' ????? ????? ????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?' ?????. ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ????? ?????. ???? ??????? ??? ????? ??????? ????? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ?????? ????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ????? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ?????: Da'at Zekenim m?ba?alei hatosfos deverim 16:15 And you shall be only happy: You find that there is written three times simcha regarding chag hasukkos, v?samachta b?chagecha, ach sameach and v?samachta lifnei Hashem Elokecha that is written in parshat emor al hakohanim, that in connection with Shavuos there is not written except once, v?samachta lifnei HaShem Elokecha. And in connection with Pesach it is not written simcha at all because on Pesach they have still not gathered in the grain, and not the fruit of the tree. And on Chag HaShavuos already they have gathered in the grain, and there is one simcha, and not more, because they still have not gathered in the fruit of the tree, or also the grain inside the house, but on Chag HaSukkos they have gathered in the grain and the fruit of the tree, and also all is grain is inside the house then the simcha is complete therefore it is written regarding it three time simcha. <> Not me - the meforshim - here for example is the Levush: - ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ???, ??????? ???? ???? ?? ????? ???????? ???? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????. ??? ???? ?? ???? ???? ???? ??? ?????? ?????. ????? ?????? ?????? ?' ?????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ????? ?' ????? ???? ???? ??? ????? ??? ????, ?? ?? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ???? ?' ?????, Levush Orech Chaim siman 660 We are accustomed to go around the bimah once every day and to put the sefer torah on the bimah when we go around it in order to go around the sefer torah because of simcha. And one who does not have a lulav does not go around like we have explained nearby. And on the seventh day we go around 7 times, in memory that they would go around the mizbeach with the lulav and the aravah seven times because of simcha of the festival that is called the time of simcha, and therefore we go around the bimah and the sefer torah is on it, in place of the altar also this is because of simcha seven times. ... > So I suppose it seems to me obvious that all the heterim the Rema > refers to cannot be because of the simcha of the siyum, especially as > the heterim were in place before the siyum was necessarily happening, > historically, which again seems to suggest that the one does not cause the other. <> On what basis do you say that? The Beis Yosef brings the Meharik as writing in shoresh 9 (unaf 2) in the name of Rabbanu Hai Gaon that on the day of Simchas Torah it is permitted to dance at the time that they say praises of the torah because they are accustomed to permit because of honour of the Torah since there is only in it because of a rabbinical decree. ??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ???"? ????? ?"? ????? ?' (??? ?) ??? ????? ??? ????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??????? ????? ????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? And while I can't seem to find the full description when I went looking for it, I am pretty sure I have seen sources about behaviour on Simchas Torah from around the times of the Geonim, where the people were going around with flaming torches. This was heavily disapproved of, as I recall, as Halachically problematic, and dancing only was permitted - I can see that in the Ritva (Chiddushei HaRitva Beitza 24a) it is mentioned briefly - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue the night of Simchat Torah, and so writes the Ritva that this is not correct because all the torch is one body". And similarly in the Shita Mekubetzes - Beitza 22a - "And so we are accustomed in a few places with a torch that was lit in the synagogue on the night of simchas Torah". But what I can't seem to find at the moment is a vivid description I am sure I have read of the scenes with juggling torches (and halachic disapproval), which then links into Rav Hai Gaon's permission of dancing (only)! The point being, that this is very old, and there were even more Halachically difficult behaviours going on, so that the authorities clamped down on torch juggling but allowed the dancing to continue (despite the rabbinic ban on dancing on Yom Tov). Wild scenes on the night of Simchas Torah are thus very old, which is why my sense is that it is even older than finishing the Torah on Simchas Torah, which I don't think become universal until about the time of at least of the rishonim, if not the later rishonim. I agree that the aliyos and layning seems to have been much newer, but the mayhem, if you like, has very old antecedents, and roots in the hakafos around the mitzbeach in the beis hamikdash (and quite likely, as the Levush says, the sefer torah was taken out on Sukkos to be the central point of the hakafos of the lulavim, and then on the last day, when there were no more lulavim, but there was still supposed to be simcha, it extended to dancing around just with the sifrei Torah, accompanied by these "praises". <> > I do see that in fact the Aruch HaShulchan seems to support you, as in > Orech Chaim siman 669 si'if 2 he says in the middle of the piece: > "And also we are accustomed that two are called up together and bless, > and even though it is not correct in any event because of the joy of > the siyum they do so ." - whereas I would have thought he should say > the joy of Yom Tov. So the Aruch HaShulchan would seem to be supporting your position. <> Yes, I suspect so, but I think you are reading that back where it doesn't belong. > > You're assuming the Rama changes topics without telling us. > > Not really. Given that mishum simcha in the context of a Yom Tov is > logically understood to mean simchas yom tov... <> And I think that makes my point exactly. They would almost certainly have to keep qualifying it throughout as "the ground of the moon", because every time they reverted back to "ground" people are likely to understand him as having returned to earth. If three sentences later they said "And Neil Armstrong when he was back on the ground, said ... ", without qualifying, it would be understood that was when he returned to earth, not when he had been into the space ship or moon rover and then out again, unless that was very, very clearly earmarked, as it is not the natural understanding. You need the words "and all this is because of the simcha of the siyum", not "and all this is because of simcha" if you want say that the simcha is Halachically generated by the siyum. And especially as, unlike coining "the ground of the moon" (which of course, people wouldn't say, they would say the "surface of the moon") the halachic obligation of simcha being generated by a siyum is not so clear. In a halachic work, the Rema needs to justify that a siyum generates a halachic requirement of simcha (which he might be able to do, if he actually held that way, by quoting the gemora about Abaye, but it does need to be spelt out - about making a yom tov for the rabbis, and that this "yom tov" reference indicates that just like simcha on a Torah mandated yom tov, one is obligated in simcha on a siyum generated yom tov - although probably this is at most rabbinic, as there is no pasuk quoted by Abaye). But if he was going to do this, he needs to provide the halachic rationale, rather than just say "and all of this is because of simcha" on a day when there is a three times Torah mandated obligation of simcha (well, minhag avosaynu b'yadenu, but on Shmini Atzeres/Simchas Torah in Israel it is three times Torah mandated) which everybody reading would know. Tir'u baTov! -Micha Chag Sameach (tripled!) Chana From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Oct 1 20:12:27 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 23:12:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah Message-ID: . I asked: > Is this "completion of the Torah" necessarily referring to the > public laining in shul each Shabbos morning? Can it possibly > refer just as well to our private learning of the parshios, such > as those who learned the parsha each week by reading it themselves > from a chumash while the shuls were closed? Granted that such > learning was not an actual chiyuv, . . . Rav Elazar Teitz corrected me: > It isn't? See OC 285:1. For those of you who did not look up his reference, it refers to Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum, which of course, is indeed an actual chiyuv. I *could* justify my comment by saying that there's no chiyuv to read the Chumash on Shabbos morning between Shacharis and Musaf if one didn't get to minyan, whereas Shnayim Mikra applies all week long. But I won't say that. :-) Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when the shuls were closed. In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes the celebration. In contrast, on Simchas Torah we dance for hours, and then we finally settle down to hear Chasan Torah. That's a siyum? But if the siyum is actually on completing Shnayim Mikra, which should have happened before leaving for shul, then the dancing is *after* finishing Vezos Habracha, which makes much more sense. This segues nicely to something I've been wanting to write for a few months now... Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I gave up on it. When the shuls closed this past spring, although (as I wrote above) I felt no obligation to read the parsha, I *did* think it was a good idea. For lack of minyan, I was davening Vasikin, and this made for a VERY long Shabbos morning. So after I finished Shacharis, I pulled out my favorite Chumash (or several of them), and read every single word aloud. It was a life-changing experience. Hearing the laining in shul, I often lose my place, or for whatever other reason I get "stuck" on an interesting pasuk or section, and I spend a few moments or minutes studying it. Of course, this inevitably leads to missing other parts of the parsha. But this year, I saw things that I might never have seen before. With no one else yet awake in the house, I had so much time to leisurely study it as deeply as I chose to. Eventually, I turned to Musaf, and quite often I ended up with a nice idea to share at lunch. When the shuls reopened, that free time was no longer there, but I didn't want to lose the chance to read every single word. And that's when I decided to start Shnayim Mikra again, pacing myself through the week. The schedule changed, but the content is still there - and now in triplicate! I really didn't expect Onkelos to teach me any new insights into the parsha, and indeed, my knowledge of Aramaic is so weak that most of his ideas went way over my head. But reading this Rosetta Stone taught me a surprising amount of Aramaic and Hebrew! In the very beginning I saw how proficiency in Shnayim Mikra could help a person's Gemara skills. As time went on, I noticed patterns of how certain Hebrew words got consistently translated into Aramaic the same way. I'll share just one example: I always presumed that the word "techum" (as in "techum Shabbos") was Hebrew. But I saw at least a half-dozen times where Onkelos uses that word as a translation of "gevul". My concordance gives close to 300 places where "gevul" appears in Tanach, and not a single case of "techum". I am led to conclude that they are not synonyms, but translations. Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! Enough rambling. I have to go finish my sukkah. Chag Sameach, everyone! Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Fri Oct 2 01:39:54 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 09:39:54 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? Message-ID: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RZS writes: <> Interesting, did you ask (or could you ask) your posek for the basis of this. It does seem to me he is drawing something of a parallel. You take a lulav and Etrog and waive it, but you don't do hakafos with it, you can take the sefer Torah, but not do hakafos with it. But when he said you could take the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely for your personal dancing purposes? Or was he talking about when the sifrei Torah were on their way back to the ark, that they were allowed a divergence to allow you to dance with them even though you had not been allowed to do hakafos with them? The reason generally given that an avel does not do hakafos with the lulav and estrog is because it is a manifestation of extreme simcha. Presumably the reason not to hold the sefer Torah during hakafos was using the same logic (otherwise why make a distinction vis a vis an avel). -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 Chag Sameach Chana From zev at sero.name Fri Oct 2 07:24:23 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:24:23 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What Will be with Simchas Torah? In-Reply-To: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> References: <000201d69897$9ab00980$d0101c80$@kolsassoon.org.uk> Message-ID: <361d52d0-e6f2-e51a-aed9-efb3de010b99@sero.name> On 2/10/20 4:39 am, Chana Luntz via Avodah wrote: > But when he said you could take > the sefer Torah after hakafos, was he suggesting that this was after they > had been put away in the ark? Ie were you then taking them out again solely > for your personal dancing purposes? No, after each hakafa, when people are just dancing with the sifrei torah before the next hakafa, I could join in the dancing, and hold a sefer torah if I liked. I could only not hold one during the hakafot themselves. Or at least that's how I understood it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 2 07:29:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:29:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Minhagim of the Ashkenaz Synagogue ("The Luach") (5781) Message-ID: See https://www.moreshesashkenaz.org/en/luach Have a look at what it says about the observance of Simchas Torah. If this were followed in all shuls, the risk of spreading the virus would be greatly decreased. Let's go back to the old time religion! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:34:37 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:34:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] amar rav papa Message-ID: Fun Fact - the abbreviation Alef Reish Peih (amar rav papa) appears twice in shas whereas the statement amar rav papa appears 702 times! Explanation? Interestingly the kitvei yad (manuscripts) don't have the abbreviation in either place. Thoughts GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Wed Oct 7 13:32:45 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 20:32:45 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community ??"? ????? ??? ???? ???? ??? ? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??? ????? ??"? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ???? ????? ??? ?? ?????...................... ??? ???? ????? ??????? ???? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ????? ?????? ????. Thoughts? GT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 9 09:28:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 12:28:09 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Why do we celebrate Shemini Atzeres? Rashi on Vayiqra 23:36 writes (taken from Sefaria): The word ["atzeres"] is derived from the root /`-tz-r/ -- "to hold back" and suggests: I keep you back with Me one day more. It is similar to the case of a king who invited his children to a banquet for a certain number of days. When the time arrived for them to take their departure he said, "Children, I beg of you, stay one day more with me; it is so hard for me to part with you!" (cf. Rashi on Numbers 29:36 and Sukkah 55b). Shemini Atzeres is a day to stop. We just crowned Hashem as King, got judged, repented for the negative things that judgment process dragged up, and celebrating Hashem's blessing the year's efforts with success including His giving us the ability and opportunity to remake ourselves, to improve. Don't just rush back off into the regular year, spend another moment with the Creator. In that sense, Shemini Atzeres is a holiday about hislamdus. We just had all these experiences. Hashem asks us to take one more day to think about them. To choose what we're going to hold on to as we go into the rest of 5781. It is therefore unsurprising that the second day of Shemini Atzeres evolved into Simchas Torah. But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the Rambam: A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he taught her foolishness. - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he is released from the obligation of Torah study.... Why does the cycle of reading parshios begin and end now? Why not on Shavuos, the holiday actually about getting the Torah? After we get the Torah, and fill our minds with Torah, we have to learn how to apply the Torah, to internalize it. And that is what we are celebrating on Simchas Torah. Not "simply" our getting the Torah, but having the hislamdus of Shemini Atzeres to figure out how to live Torah. Gutt Shabbos, Gutn Moieid, a Gutn Kvitl, un Gutt Yontef! Or, if that's your flavor: Shabbat Shalom, Mo'adim leSimchah, Pisqa Tava, veChag Sameiach! -Micha -- Micha Berger The goal isn't to live forever, http://www.aishdas.org/asp the goal is to create so mething that will. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 18:55:37 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 21:55:37 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv Message-ID: Several reasons are given for why we say Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv *after* the Amidah. Among those reasons (given by Tosfos in Pesachim 106a "Zochrayhu", and Mechaber 268:7) is this: On a regular Fri night, Vayechulu is already part of the Maariv Amidah, but it is *not* part of the Maariv Amidah if that Shabbos would also be Yom Tov. So, to ensure that Vayechulu gets recited even in such cases, we say it after the Amidah *every* Friday night. This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is it done by anyone? Is there some reason why adding Vayechulu to the Amidah might be considered a hefsek or otherwise inappropriate? I note that when Yom Tov falls on Shabbos, Nusach Ashkenaz *does* add Yismechu B'malchus'cha to the Musaf Amidah. What makes that different than Vayechulu? Just wondering. Thanks in advance for whatever ideas anyone has. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Oct 11 19:10:45 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 22:10:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich quoted the Igros Moshe O"C 2:105, and asked: > I was wondering whether r' moshe would've said the same thing had > he known the impact of koshering 10 pm slichot in the MO community You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect that he *was* aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have retracted his words or clarified them. Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 12 03:23:22 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:23:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] It's 10PM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <935536B9-45F5-45C4-8A86-C8FA30E4E279@segalco.com> > You are presuming that he did NOT know the impact of his psak. I suspect > that he was aware. After all, the teshuva you cited was dated Elul 5720 > (1959); he had several decades afterward during which he could have > retracted his words or clarified them. > Second: What do you think he might have said differently? Look at the > part you quoted. He can't get much clearer than that. If you are upset > about the popularity of "10 pm slichot in the MO community", I don't > think any of the blame can be put on Rav Moshe. Rather, there must be > other poskim that people are relying on. (Anyone know who?) > Akiva You are correct -- I don't know for a fact whether he was aware of the likelihood of this result. I'm not sure the lack of retraction is significant. I wonder how it actually worked when chazal made a takana and The tzibbur Could not (would not?) carry it out (Even though chazal Thought they would) I certainly don't want to give the impression that I was blaming Rav Moshe, My assumption is that the feeling is better that they say it at all rather than not say it. I'm also not sure what the relative weights that are given to the pros and cons are fully understood by the populace. Kt Joel rich From zev at sero.name Mon Oct 12 07:29:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:29:01 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not an answer, but two notes: 1. Not everyone does say Vayechulu in the Amida. Those who say "Me'ahavatecha" instead of "Ata Kidashta" don't, and therefore the question doesn't arise. 2. This "overinclusive" takana seems similar to the one forbidding eggs laid on every Shabbos and Yomtov just to cover the case of a yomtov that's on a Friday or a Sunday. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 12 14:03:46 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Is Polygyny a Good Thing? Message-ID: <20201012210346.GA18934@aishdas.org> H/T RYGB R' Moshe Tzuriel's account (I assume maintained by his students) shared the following on FB. https://www.facebook.com/RabbiMosheTzuriel/posts/1475152189362617 Translation mine, corrections requested. Tir'u baTov! -Micha HaRav Moshe Tzuriel October 10 [2020] at 9:10pm [IDT] Question: It is known that nowadays there is Cheirem deRabbi Gershom that prohibits a man from marrying two women. Does this imply that from the Torah it is okay to do so? Or is it still undesirable? Answer: We have two editions of the medrash "Avos deRabbi Natan" (which was composed shortly after completion of the Talmud). In the version from Eretz Yisrael, which was available to ("in the hands of") some of the rishonim and is now being reprinted, at the beginning of chapter two, Rabbi Yehudah ben Beteirah says, "If Adam haRishon deserved to be given ten wives, [HQBH] would have given [them] to him. But it was only proper to give him but one woman only. I, too, am enough for my wife, my portion is enough for me." Also in the medrash Pesiqta Rabati (pisqa 44) they criticized Elqanah, the father of Shemuel haNavi: "And after all this praise, it is written, 'And he had two wives'?" Similarly in the Targum on Rus (4:6) it explains the reason for Peloni Almoni's refusale to take Rus as a wife. Because it is not done to take a second wife, and he was already married. And also in Ketubot (62b) about Rebbi's son. When it was discovered that his wife was infertile, he refrained from taking another wife, lest they say this one is his wife and this one -- his prostitute. Rabbi Reuven Margaliot wrote a maamar about this (in his book "Olelot", published by Mosad haRav Kook, pg. 17) and brings some more sources. One of them is what the end of Tractate Ta'anit describes, because on Tu beAv the daughters of Israel went out to the vineyards "and whoever does not have a wife will go there." Explaining, what business does someone who already has a wife have with this? The fact is that in all the five hundred Tannaim and Amoraim mentioned in the Talmud and Midrashim, we did not find one of them that had two wives! And even if you ask about Avraham Avinu, there is no question here, because Sarah forced him to take Hagar (Bereishis 16:2). And it is stated in the Bible "and give it to Avram a woman to wed" (v. 3). And with our ancestor Yaaqov, he only asked for Rachel, but Laban cheated and burdened Leah as well. And it was those two women who demanded that he also take Bilhah and Zilpah (Genesis 30:4,9). Yaaqov did not want them, but he was humble and pleasant and did the will of his wife. And Yitzchaq Avinu, even though his wife was infertile for twenty years, never took a second wife. Today in our parsha [Bereishis] we are told about a negative example, Lamech Ben Methuselah. He took two wives, one for childbirth and one for beauty (Rashi on Bereishis 4:19). And what became of it (according to Rashi in pasuq 20)? Two sons who served Avodah Zara. He also had a son who made copper vessels, from which a weapons were made. "From the wicked came the wicked." >From all this it is clear that the Torah is disapproving of one who takes for himself two wives. From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Oct 12 11:55:30 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 18:55:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Do foods that are certified vegan require hashgacha? Since these foods cannot contain meat, fowl or fish, can it be assumed they are kosher? A. No, such an assumption is unfounded. First, although the manufacturer or restaurant claims to be vegan, it is halachically questionable whether one may accept as fact claims made by companies for their own benefit. Igeros Moshe (Even Ha?ezer 5:42 and see also YD 1:55) writes that one can only rely on ingredient statements if the company would face government fines if the information were found to be untrue. Second, vegan foods can be non-kosher even if they do not contain meat, fowl, or fish. A vegan food may have a status of Bishul Akum (foods cooked by a nochri that can be served to a distinguished guest and could not have been eaten raw) which is not kosher. Vegan foods may also contain non-kosher wine or wine vinegar, as well as fruits and vegetables that are prone to infestation. Although many vegans will not eat insects, their standard for cleaning may not meet halachic requirements. Finally, if the product was cooked with non-kosher utensils, it would not be acceptable even if all the ingredients were kosher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 13 10:16:14 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 13:16:14 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky Message-ID: <20201013171614.GC31714@aishdas.org> To my mind, this is a very important read. But, if you get Avodah in digest form, the Hebrew will be all "?"s. So, use the link at the top to see the web page version. Did I mention that I think this is a VERY important read? Shetir'u baTov, -micha ----- Forwarded message from torahweb at torahweb.org ----- Read this on the web Posted Erev Hoshana Rabbah, 5781, Thursday, October 8, 2020. An annotated, slightly edited written version of oral remarks. CHILUL HASHEM IN THE STREETS: RESPONSE TO THE PROTESTS Rabbi Mayer Twersky I Two stories have unfolded in recent days. The first is that of politicians and the press repeatedly identifying COVID-19 red zones in New York State as Orthodox Jewish Neighborhoods; such hatemongering would, justly, be deemed intolerable and thus never happen vis-a-vis any other religious, ethnic or racial groups. The second is that of a massive chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name) in response. [In truth, elements of chilul Hashem also antedate the actions of the politicians and press.] We are, b'siyatta d'Shmaya, going to exclusively focus on the second story. [The first should be appropriately responded to, separately.] The reason being that a chilul Hashem is just that, regardless of provocation; provocation, undeniable as it is, does not diminish or mitigate chilul Hashem. II There is no suspense. In relating to chilul Hashem, there is one - and only one - vital, mandatory, conclusion: condemnation. What needs to be emphasized at the outset and continuously experienced and re-enforced throughout is that the condemnation is self-condemnation. Kol Yisroel Areivim zeh bo'zeh. The Jewish people are one; and, as such, all are mutually responsible and interdependent (Shavuos 39a). There is no "us" and "them", only one organic, encompassing "we". [It is self-understood that this interdependence is an internal reality and perspective; the external world has not been granted license to assign collective blame.] III One final introductory note: please do not draw inferences from what is not said. The following remarks, due to three factors, are very incomplete. 1) Lack of time - response to chilul Hashem must be swift, thus not allowing the requisite time for comprehensiveness 2) Lack of yishuv ha'da'as (composure) - the ongoing chilul Hashem has, for so many of us, been so personally, deeply, disturbing and profoundly painful that it has been difficult to muster the concentration and focus needed to respond clearly and comprehensively 3) Lack of ability - my own limitations and inadequacies IV Let us b'siyatta d'Shmaya initially, schematically list some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem and subsequently try to penetrate to the core and crux of this sacrilege. Throughout words are inadequate to depict and denounce the various manifestations of chilul Hashem. * Violence - the shocking violence was simply vile and depraved. [Perhaps protestors were surprised on Tuesday night, and did not intend to associate with such vile, violent behavior. Wednesday night, however, featured a repeat performance under the same irresponsible, so-called leadership.] * Mob behavior masquerading as halachic - the dangerous distortion and abusive invocation of the halacha of moser was reprehensible. * Hooliganism - setting fires is wild, lawless, uncivilized behavior * Flaunting public health measures in a hot spot in the midst of a pandemic - such benighted behavior is the antithesis of "?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ????? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ???" - "you shall study (alternatively, esteem) and fulfill; that [will project] your wisdom and discernment to the nations of the world, who will hear of these statues [of the Torah] and remark, 'how wise and discerning this great nation is!'" (Devarim 4:6) * Allowing for, and even encouraging, reckless, irresponsible so-called leadership - there is absolutely no justification for allowing so-called leadership that consists, inter alia, of incitement and nivul peh (uncouth, disgusting speech). And if, on Tuesday night, the protest was hijacked, all present were obligated to immediately leave and disassociate from the unfolding chilul Hashem These are some of the incidents and instances of chilul Hashem; each one was entirely, egregiously gratuitous, in no way warranted by the journalistic and political provocation. Following is an attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to reflect, albeit partially, on their core and crux. V We begin with a story. A ben Torah from a thriving Jewish community met my grandfather zt"l. After an exchange of greetings, my grandfather inquired as to where the individual lived. Upon hearing the answer, he responded, "a very fine community. There is only one problem: they forget they are in glaus (exile)." ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ???' - Lavan, the Aramean, attempted to destroy my father's household; subsequently he descended to Egypt, and lived there as a stranger, etc. ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? - this verse teaches us that our patriarch Yaakov did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to sojourn (Devarim 26:5, Sifrei ad. loc; Haggadah Shel Pesach) How extraordinary! Yaakov Avinu knew that his earthly life would end in Mitzrayim. Hakadosh Baruch Hu had promised him that He would return his body to Eretz Yisroel for burial. See Breishis 46:4, with Rashi ad. loc. quoting Chazal. And yet, he viewed himself as a stranger in Mitzrayim, his stay as temporary. Galus Mitzrayim (the Egyptian exile) serves as a paradigm for all subsequent galuyos (exiles.) Irrespective of the duration of his stay, a Jew in chutz la'aretz (outside the Land of Israel) is never at home. The land is not his; the streets are not his. ???? ???? ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ??? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????, ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??, ?????, ???? ?????? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??????, ??? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ???????. Yaakov Avinu's request to be buried in Eretz Yisroel forged a natural bond between his descendants and the land, whereby they would yearn for the land of their ancestors and view themselves as strangers. This is the import of Chazal's comment, "He sojourned there - this teaches that Yaakov Avinu did not intend to settle in Egypt, rather to live as an outlier" i.e., this teaches us how Jews ought to comport themselves in each and every exile. They should know that they are not supposed to settle, rather to sojourn, and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmo, Vayikra, 26:44) [Once again, note that this perspective is exclusively internal; the nations of the world have not been granted license to disenfranchise us.] VI The brazenness and arrogance of the protests have been appalling. The defiance and claims of proprietorship - "no one is going to stop us; let them try!"; "this is our neighborhood" - are the antithesis of the foundation of Jewish existence and continuity in the diaspora. How lamentably and deplorably ironic that such sacrilegious, antithetical behavior was allegedly intended to preserve our singular Jewish religious identity and way of life. (See below section VIII.) [To be clear, the behavior and tone of the protests would have been intolerable in Eretz Yisroel as well. We are reacting to the protests in the diaspora context in which they happened.] To be sure, this modus vivendi in exile does not mean we should accept being trampled upon; the Torah allows for effective, responsible, respectful protest. ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ?? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ????? ??? ????????? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ??????? ????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??? ????? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ?????? ???? The Roman Empire issued an edict forbidding Torah study, circumcision, and Sabbath observance. What did Yehuda son of Shamo'a and his colleagues do? They sought council from a well-connected [aristocratic] woman. She advised them, "come and demonstrate at night." They went, demonstrated at night and said, "for the sake of heaven, are we not brothers? the sons of a single father and mother? in what way do we differ from all other nations that you issue harsh decrees against us? And the authorities rescinded the decrees (Rosh Hashana 19a) What a profound contrast between the restrained, respectful mode of protest adopted by Chazal, and the gratuitously brazen, confrontational mode displayed these past two nights. Bayshanus (humble refinement, healthy inhibition) is a defining Jewish characteristic (see Yevamos 79a.) Chazal protested Jewishly. The azus ponim (brazenness and arrogance) which characterized the protests betrayed the very essence of Jewishness. VII Let us attempt b'siyatta d'Shmaya to probe another core aspect of the chilul Hashem. ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ?????? ????? ??? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?"? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ???? ????? ?????? ?????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ??' ???? ???? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ??????? ??' The content of the mandate to be holy as explicated by Chazal is this: the Torah prohibits incestuous and adulterous relationships, as well as non-kosher foods. The Torah, however, permits marital relations and consumption of meat and wine. Thus, the individual with hedonistic inclinations would find an opening for orgiastic behavior with his wife (or wives) and gluttonous consumption of meat and wine etc. and he would have been a naval with license from the Torah. The mandate "Be holy" precludes this. After detailing specific prohibitions, the Torah commands in general, sweeping terms that we abstain from all forms of excess... (Ramban, Vayikra 19:2) At first glance, the mitzvah "Be holy", according to Ramban, closes what would otherwise be gaping holes in the Torah. Upon reflection, however, Ramban's teaching runs much deeper. A crucial clue for deeper understanding is provided by Ramban's famous phrase, "he would have been (i.e., absent the mitzvah 'Be holy') a naval with license from the Torah." What does the word naval denote? The author of Hakesav VeHakabala (in his commentary to Devarim 32:6) explains the semantics of naval. ??"? ?? ???? ???? ?"? ???? ????? ??????? ??' ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? A dead animal is dubbed a neveila due to the loss of its vital essence...just as the term neveila refers to loss of vital physical essence, it also refers to loss (or destruction) of essential spiritual essence - i.e., acting in a way that destroys human spiritual splendor In other words, naval denotes one whose outer, external shell and appearance endure but is void of its essence and vitality. The hollow externality masks an inner vacuum. Thus, when predicated of an animal, neveila refers to a lifeless body. And, when predicated of a person, naval refers to a soulless physicality. Thus, in Psalms, an atheist is described as a naval. "??? ??? ???? ??? ?????" the naval, in his heart, denies the existence of God (14:1, 53:2.) The atheist's external appearance is human, but in denying Hakadosh Baruch Hu he has forfeited his humanity. It is fittingly emblematic of one whose external appearance belies his inner vacuity that he outwardly professes faith, while inwardly rejecting it. VIII Mitzvos haTorah are vibrantly bi-dimensional, consisting of body and soul. Both components are Divinely mandated and inseparable. The prescribed or proscribed action or speech constitutes the body; the religious-moral-spiritual value and telos comprise the soul. Thus, by way of illustration, proscribed incestuous and adulterous relationships form the body. Chaste, redeemed, sanctified physicality comprises the soul. So too for prohibited foods. An individual who "observes" these mitzvos but behaves orgiastically with his wife and/or eats and drinks gluttonously is a naval. Outwardly he appears observant, but actually is decadent. A beguiling externality of observance masks a reality of non-observance. In his hands, Torah becomes soulless - a dry, legalistic compendium of technical, superficial, unidimensional rules and regulations. The naval's infractions are not discrete or self-contained; instead they vitiate and violate all of Torah. He lives not Torah, but a cruel caricature of Torah. IX Avodas Hashem (service of God), in general, is rooted in shiflus (submissiveness to, and before, God). The mitzvos of tefillah (prayer) and simcha (rejoicing), in particular, are beautiful, soulful expressions of such shiflus. ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ???, ????"? ????? - one can pray only with koved rosh, i.e. submissiveness (Berachos 30b, with Rashi ad loc.) ???? ?????? ????? ?? ... (?)????? ????? ??? ????? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ??? ????? ????? ??? ??' ??? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ????? ?????. ??? ??? ??? ????? ??? "?????? ??? ???? ?????? ??? ?????" (????? ? ? ??). It is a mitzvah (on Sukkos in the Beis Hamikdash) to rejoice in a maximal fashion ... the joy that a person experiences and expresses in performing mitzvos, reflecting his love for God who commanded them is a great form of service ... and one who lowers himself, oblivious to prestige on these occasions is a great, dignified person who serves Hashem out of love. David, King of Israel, exemplified this, saying, "I would go even further in making light of myself, and become genuinely lowly in my own eyes" (Rambam, Hilchos Lulav, 8:14-15) When we brazenly and arrogantly, even violently, protest, ostensibly as to be allowed to gather in an unrestricted fashion for prayer and Sukkos celebrations, we act as nevalim, Rachmana litzlan. We distort and contort the beautiful, soulful mitzvos of tefillah and simcha, rooted in shiflus, into dry, legalistic, soulless, superficial, hypocritical performances. Talmud Torah (Torah study) is a pillar of faith [see Rambam, Hilchos Kerias Shema 1:2] whereby we submit to ratzon Hashem (the will of God), humbly consecrate and elevate our intellects, become enlightened by the luminous words of Torah, and "connect" to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. When we violently, primitively protest, allegedly to keep yeshivos open, we make a mockery of talmud Torah. We act as nevalim. When we distort and abuse sacred halachos to provide cover for mob violence, we act as nevalim. What results is a colossal chilul Hashem. X ????? ??????? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?? ???? ????? (????? ?? ?) ??? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ????? ???. ?? ???? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ????? It is prohibited to delay in the slightest in overriding Shabbos for a dangerously ill individual. "'[These are miztvos] that man will fulfill and thereby live' - he should not die on their account." This teaches that mitzvos haTorah do not embody harsh justice in the world. Rather they embody compassion, kindness and perfection in the world (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:3) Demonstrating zealous concern for life, even, when warranted, to the point of temporarily overriding mitzvos, reflects and preserves their true, essential character. On the other hand, disregarding health protocols designed to protect life suffocates the soul of miztvos. We have been, inexplicably and inexcusably, selective in our reactions. Over the past months on multiple occasions we have vociferously protested and challenged the governor's actions and yet while the hotspots developed we remained deafeningly silent. The silence continues in the face of the brazen, violent chilul Hashem reaction which again saps the soul of miztvos. These glaring inconsistencies also create a naval bereshus haTorah effect. And chilul Hashem ensues. And, finally, we note the obvious: violating and/or subverting the dina demalchusa (halachically recognized law of the land) only compounds the chilul Hashem. So too the silence in the face of such subversion and violation. XI The teshuva (repentance) for chilul Hashem, Rabbeinu Yona (Shaarei Teshuva, Gate 4, para. 5) teaches, is kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name.) May we merit a piska tova (favorable "verdict card"), a year of kiddush Hashem, yeshuos (salvation), and nechamos (consolation). From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 13 15:42:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:42:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our exile from Israel was intended as punishment , but has become comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said about our exile from shul and yeshiva. Question-What priority (resources/time )should/do the American orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with them? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Oct 14 13:56:49 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 16:56:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> References: <20201009162809.GA2015@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201014205649.GD24360@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 12:28:09PM -0400, I wrote: > But first, a pitstop to look at RSWolbe's introduction to Hislamdus, > to where he links Hislamtus to Torah. We start with his quoting the > Rambam: > > A woman who learned Torah receives reward, but not like the reward > of a man, because she isn't obligated. Etc... And even though > she receives reward, our sages commanded that a man not teach > his daughter Torah, because most women's intellects aren't ready > lehislameid. Rather, they find the words of Torah to be words > of emptiness according to the poverty of their intellect. Our > sages said that one who teaches his daughter Torah is like he > taught her foolishness. > > - Hil' Talmud Torah 1:13 > > The Rambam teaches us through this that the purpose of Torah study > is hislamdus, and someone whose intellect isn't ready lehislameid he > is released from the obligation of Torah study.... One chaver couldn't get past this. I didn't see that coming. I did the first time I ran a vaad using this section of Alei Shur with a non-O population. But they didn't have a problem. Nor any of the groups since. Non-O Jews are used to picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't. I guess because we do this far less often, expecting primary sources to be authoritative and accepted, this chaver was thrown. Reaching RSW's conclusion from the Rambam doesn't require accepting the Rambam's opinion of women and their ability to learn. You can understand it as the Rambam's prejudice, a statement sadly true of women in many cultures in history (and some today) and particularly living among 12th century Almohad Muslems. The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. We're talking out an "if X then Y" from the Rambam to derive something about where the value of talmud Torah (other than fulfilling a chiyuv) resides. You don't need to worry about whether the Rambam was correct in assuming X holds, just in his assuming the if-then. And, as I said, my non-O students are somehow used to thinking that way. While O Jews have less calling to do the same, there is still a profound need to do so. Beyond examples like this Rambam. After all, eilu va'eilu Divrei Elokim Chaim. If we want to learn from sefarim that promote derakhim that don't share our givens, we need to be able to extract the elements that can enhance my derekh from the ones that are incompatible with it. Tir'u baTov! -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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 14:10:37 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 21:10:37 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul hashem. I have had this discussion a number of times with a number of different people who have absolutely denied that actions which make others think badly of frum Jews is any way a problem of chilul hashem unless, and this is an important rider, their actions are inherently aveiros in Hashem's eyes. According to this, if you are doing right in Hashem's eye ie keeping mitzvos bein adam l'makom, there can never be an issue of chillul hashem. This will justify violence and thuggery of all kinds when it's purportedly l'sheim shamayim. It will justify any kind of inconvenience to all around you for the sake of public tefila b'tzibbur. It will justify all and any public health hazard for the purpose of a mitzva. And I don't mean people just don't realise what the halacha is about what chillul hashem. I mean that even when you present them with relevant sources and reasoning they deny that it is so. By way of illustration, in an article in the Tablet this week a Jewish journalist present at the attack in Borough Park asked a rioter 'what will the goyim think?' The rioter replied that he could not care less what the goyim think. It is beyond my pay grade why this attitude has become so widespread amongst large sections of those who learn Torah, but it certainly has. I encourage people to have this discussion if you wish to verify it. It seems to me that the more insular the community, the more certain the majority of its members are of this travesty of halacha. Don't take my word for it, ask people. So while I'm glad there are voices like R Twersky's, we need to realise that his words will have no effect whatsoever on the vast majority of the people concerned. I fear the primary issue of chilul hashem, ie causing people to think badly of frum Jews, is a meis mitzva. Huge numbers of people simply do not, can not, will not understand that this is a problem. Personally I can not think of any single issue more pressing to address in the Jewish world than this. The potential for future damage to Torah communities, to genuine ruchniyos, to our relationship with the world as a whole, is mindboggling. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 14 15:51:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 18:51:07 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:10:37PM +0000, Ben Bradley wrote: > The elephant in the room is that the there is absolutely no recognition > amongst the m'chalalei hashem that their actions constitute chilul > hashem.. I think there is a more fundamental problem... I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. Chazal say that the sum total of all of Torah is "that which you loathe, don't do to others" or that it can be generalized as "ve'ahavta lerei'akha kamokha" or "eileh toledos ha'adam". The actual inventor of "Yeshivish" taught it was all about nosei be'ol im chaveiro (R Chaim Volozhiner as per his repeated instruction to his son). Rav Shimon said that we were created and given the Torah, "so that our greatest desire should be lehitiv im zulaseinu ... bedemus haBorei kevayakhol." (Introduction to Shaarei Yosher; WYT pg 45.) But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. Rav Wolbe defines "frumkeit" as an instinct to be holy, which like all instincts is about the self. It's the attempt to use ritual mitzvos to find holiness, without da'as or thinking about Retzon haBorei. And it is unsurprising that we got here. O went through its Rupture and Reconstruction, reborn after predictions of its demise that were so common in the 1960s and early '70s. Understandable, the emergent self-definition would be about those things that make O unique. And this was an era when there was a lot less distinct about Torah Ethics and Morality in contrast to Western values. We stood out from C by how we kept Shabbos, Kashrus and Taharas HaMishapachah (as the idiom goes), not by how we were trying to be givers rather than takers. (C.f. R' Dessler's Qunterus haChessed in MmE vol I.) So the emergent self-definition came to be about rituals. Add the Me Generation and its zeitgeist. And voila! Frumkeit. Now we're trapped in this culture where spirituality is about going to shul to try to be holy. More so than about safeiq piquach nefesh. And to deal with the resulting cognitive dissonance we grab on to anyone suggesting that the risk is negligable, and invent new and anti-mesoretic theologies that say the risk is metaphysically avoided, and that it is okay to be somkhin al haneis with other people's lives. Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total distortion of Torah. And the cultural pendulum won't start swinging the other way until we shine a spotlite on Ahavas Yisrael and Ahavas haBerios, and mitzvos that can be reinterpreted within the Frum framework. To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah umitzvos? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I always give much away, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and so gather happiness instead of pleasure. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rachel Levin Varnhagen - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Oct 14 16:46:52 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:46:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: But we, we replaced all this talk about being ehrlicher Yidn and now call ourselves "frum" Jews. We call ourselves by the term people like R Aharon Kotler, or my grandma, reserved for the hyperfocus on rituals of the local Russian Orthodox priest. https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/972417/rabbi-daniel-hartstein/my-rebbe-rav-ahron-soloviechik/ Rabbi Daniel Hartstein-My Rebbe: Rav Ahron Soloviechik R'Chaim quoted as saying, "a galach is frum, a yid is ehrlich" KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Oct 14 23:46:23 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 06:46:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> References: , <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Sent from > > I think there is a more fundamental problem... > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn?t matter at all what the world thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently deal with the lack of concern for others? perceptions. > > > Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total > distortion of Torah . Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are shocking because they are unusual . Whereas Chilul HaShem of the kind caused by lack of concern whatsoever about what the Other thinks of us is maaseh b?col Yom. Just get on an aeroplane to EY for quick examples. What has been highlighted is how easily the one becomes the other. Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . > > To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally > risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the > problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now. > With so much of the Frum World having gone OTD, who is leading the > new kind of Orthodoxy, starting the old-new culture of shemiras Torah > umitzvos? > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn?t agree more that it?s a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and seriously , how do WE change things Ben From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 15:12:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 18:12:38 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Chilul Hashem in the Streets: Response to the Protests - Rav Mayer Twersky In-Reply-To: References: <20201014225107.GB10660@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201015221238.GA30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 06:46:23AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > > I don't think we should be talking about chilul hasheim. If we don't > > create a culture where mitzvos BALC are thought of as at least as real > > as mitzvos BALM, we are still set up for this problem. > True but the mindset that it really doesn't matter at all what the world > thinks of us is still something of a separate matter. Although a Torah > true appreciation of the importance of BALC would probably inherently > deal with the lack of concern for others' perceptions. My perspective in calling this a more fundemtnal problem is that if we aren't doing Torah right, the fact that doing it the wrong way looks bad to others is only a consequence. >> Worrying about chilul hasheim when avaq retzichah is afoot is a total >> distortion of Torah. > Granted. But avak retzicha is rare. The events of the last week are > shocking because they are unusual... I wasn't clear. To me, beating someone else unconscious isn't avaq retzichah. That term is too mild for the crime. Besides, the hooligans look like they were a bunch of teens with nothing to do over chol hamo'eid -- the kind of thing no community over a certain size will ever be entirely free from. (Although an Other-Focused Orthodoxy would have fewer, one would think.) So what /was/ I referring to as avaq retzichah? I meant the disregard for safeiq piquach nefesh we've been seeing since March or so. The prioritizing of minyan, halvayas hameis, mesameiach chasan kekalah -- important as they are -- over the increased number of medical fragile people who are going to die from these behaviors. > Albeit that lack of concern for BALC is the common factor . >> To me this is a "Mi Lashem Eilai!" kind of moment. People are literally >> risking others' lives. We can't stay any longer at the "identifying the >> problem" stage; we need to start working toward a solution. Now.... > And that is the million dollar question. I couldn't agree more that it's > a mi lahashem eili moment. But indeed who are our leviim? > The crisis of leadership in Klal Yisroel has never been more evident > than right now. How do we change things? And I mean quite literally and > seriously, how do WE change things I wasn't sure. Not that my efforts are having kehillah-changing success, but so far I had e-launched two ideas: - The AishDas Society: as a place where benei aliyah could meet or e-meet. (Benei Aliyah was the term Mussarnikim used to refer to what themselves and the more spiritually awake Chassidim had in common.) In theory, not necessarily mussar, in practice (especially once RGS went off to do his own thing), all our programming was mussar. And to leverage our influence, we offered services for shuls to help them run their own programs. And we have the capacity of providing - Other-Focused Orthodoxy / Mevaqshei Tov veYosher: as a core for building a Yiddishkeit based on BALC (qodmah laTorah). Whereas AishDas would be for people actively seeking growth (of any sort) OFO was a repainting of the goal to be growing toward; not necessarily only for people willing to invest time to work at it. A reframing of the message in the classroom and pulpit, and thus the mental self-image. The kind of ideal Rav Shimon advocates and my book expands upon, or that of the other 35 or so primary sources I collected at https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/142643.6 But I lack basic tools to make either happen on any scale: (1) a gadol or at least a charismatic rabbi who is a popular speaker, and (2) a gevir, without which we don't get the hours, real estate, and other materials. And most gerivim got that way (or didn't blow through an inheritance) by knowing how to make things happen. I dream of staring an OFO flagship shul. I figure that's easier than starting a school. But since it's largely a sociological phenomanon, classes, chaburos or ve'adim wouldn't go as far to change someone's self-definition as an institution signiticant enough to "belong to". I expect to pass away a very frustrated man. (It's the fate of someone who never stops being a teenager with a teenager's big dreams.) Unless I keep on shouting until someone with those tools gets on board... Meanwhile, there is https://www.amazon.com/Widen-Your-Tent-Thoughts-Integrity/dp/1946351555 Tir'u baTov! -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 larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Oct 15 05:14:40 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 08:14:40 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha Message-ID: From today's OU kosher halacha yomis Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so? A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize that the consumer?s interest was limited to one or two kosher items. Thus, in addition to maris ayin and chashad at a vegan restaurant, there is also a possible violation of ?lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol? ? causing another Jew to ?stumble? and eat non-kosher. As such, frequenting a vegan restaurant is more serious than entering a non-kosher restaurant, as lifnei iver lo si?tain michshol is not a concern with a non-kosher restaurant since the non-kosher status is well known.

From today's OU kosher halacha yomis

Q. There is a vegan restaurant in my community, but it does not have hashgacha. Someone told me, that you can go in and order a coffee and roll because these are made on dedicated equipment and nothing can go wrong. Is one permitted to do so?

A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. Though unlikely, coffee may be made on non-kosher equipment. Even if the kosher status of the coffee and rolls was verified, entering an uncertified vegan restaurant, which sells kosher and non-kosher products, may appear suspicious to an onlooker. Igeros Moshe (OC II:40) discusses this very issue, whether one may enter a non-kosher restaurant to purchase foods that are known to be kosher? He writes that this would be a violation of both maris ayin (literally, ?the vision of the eye?, but the intent is causing the observer to become lax in their Torah observance) and chashad (literally suspicious, which means that the person?s reputation may be compromised). There is an additional concern with entering a non-certified vegan restaurant. The observer may assume that all vegan restaurants are kosher, and not realize -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:20:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:20:16 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vegan Restaurant Without Hashgacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232016.GG30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:40AM -0400, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU kosher halacha yomis ... > A. No. Rolls may contain non-kosher oils, stabilizers and emulsifiers. It depends on why they're vegan. Those motivated by Eastern Religions are maqpidim not only on miniscule ingrediants, but also many care about vegan keilim. Certainly to the point that I would think stam keilim einam ben yoman is a safe assumption. E.g. see https://www.quora.com/Why-would-a-vegan-or-vegetarian-insist-that-separate-cooking-vessels-or-utensils-be-used-from-those-used-in-cooking-meat-dishes It is true that "certified vegan" doesn't go that far, but some smaller cetification agencies like V Label do . So, I am not sure why the OU makes such a pessimistic blanket statement about all vegans. I would have gone by spelling out that you would need to be a very savy consumer to know what they mean by "vegan". And otherwise the word alone doesn't tell you anything. Or explain why even the die-hard vegans aren't trying to check for everything we do. Because if saying you're "very very vegan" when you're not is a risk to business, I would want to see an argument about why the claim isn't in principle sufficient, or pragmatically hard to make use of. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Oct 15 16:23:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:23:06 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] forms of teshuvah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015232306.GH30026@aishdas.org> On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 11:57:21PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > Of these four, the first is what we consider standard teshuvah and > > the second is going above and beyond. The third and fourth are not - > > and should not be - practiced today. The Vilna Gaon's brother (Ma'alos > > Ha-Torah, introduction) makes clear that we cannot undergo these harsh > > forms of teshuvah in our time (his time, even more so in our time) > > and emerge physically and religiously healthy. Instead, he recommends > > intense Torah study. > what is the nature of the paradigm change claimed by the Ma'alos Ha-Torah? I don't know if he says what changed. But you're comparing Chasidei Ashkenaz during the Middle Ages to Jews living after the Enlightenment. A whole different attitude toward man and sin swept the west in between. Changing how people would respond to self-flagellation. Tir'u baTov! -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 Thu Oct 15 16:32:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2020 19:32:11 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] What will be with Simchas Torah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201015233211.GI30026@aishdas.org> On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 11:12:27PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Instead, I will reiterate and strengthen my first comment: Does anyone > explicitly say that this siyum is on the public laining? Perhaps this siyum > (Simchas Torah) is really on our accomplishment of having completed a full > cycle of Shnayim Mikra! And if so, then this year's Simchas Torah is as > genuine as ever, at least for those people who continued learning even when > the shuls were closed. I argued that the fact is, we daven with the Seifer Torah we lein from, not the Chumash (or digital device) we learned 2M1T from. And we celebrate with Chasan Torah and Chasan Bereishis -- the last and first people called up for an aliyah in each cycle. > In fact, I'll note that when we have a regular Siyum, we generally have the > Mesayem learn his final piece, and that leads to the celebration. We might > begin by sitting down and making Hamotzi, but always, the learning precedes > the celebration... The learning precedes the se'udah. As it is supposed to on Simchas Torah. The ubiquitous pre-leining qiddush evolved (1) only after the dancing and leining ran after chatzos, causing halachic problems with facting all morning; (2) very late altogether in the development of ST. Perhaps even not until the 20th cent. So how can you say it's a defining feature of the intent behind its establishment, perhaps a millennium earlier? > Once upon a time, I did learn Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum regularly. But I > was young, and still in yeshiva, and didn't appreciate the Aramaic, and I > gave up on it... FWIW, I did 2M1Hirsch for some years. Then I found the Metzudah Translation of the targum on line. So I went to reading a translation of the targum, followed by a rishon who gives peshat. This year -- Seforno. (I fell in love with his Other-Focused Orthodoxy intro in Kavvanas haTorah. I translated what was for me the maney quote at . > Another example that I noticed a few days ago: I should have figured this > out decades ago, from the word "yalfinan" ("we learn"), but it was not > until I saw Onkelos on Devarim 33:10 that it dawned on me that "ulpan" - > the place where olim learn Hebrew - is an Aramaic word! The irony is delicious! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From akivagmiller at gmail.com Fri Oct 16 04:43:49 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 07:43:49 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > From the RCBC (Rabbinic Council of Bergen County): Just as our > exile from Israel was intended as punishment, but has become > comfortable and even preferable to many, the same may be said > about our exile from shul and yeshiva. > Question-What priority (resources/time) should/do the American > orthodox community (and its leadership) spend on thinking about > the first part of this statement? Does the analogy resonate with > them? The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* the way we are meant to be. Along similar lines, whenever I decry those who violate The Rules in order to hold otherwise-forbidden minyanim or shiurim, I am careful to add that I wish I was as devoted to these things as they are. But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 16 01:18:17 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 08:18:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification Message-ID: Please see the article at https://jewishaction.com/food/kashrut/a-fishy-story-purchasing-fish-from-a-store-without-kosher-certification/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Bereshit%205781%20old%20template%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32658320&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1803712920&spReportId=MTgwMzcxMjkyMAS2 YL [https://jewishaction.com/content/uploads/2020/09/shutterstock_550158820-scaled.jpg] A Fishy Story: Purchasing Fish from a Store without Kosher Certification - Jewish Action Guidelines from Rabbi Chaim Goldberg, the OU Kosher fish expert jewishaction.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ygbechhofer at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:23:52 2020 From: ygbechhofer at gmail.com (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2020 23:23:52 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I could remember from whom I heard it! KT, GC, YGB From penkap at panix.com Sun Oct 18 07:14:45 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:14:45 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: I was the chaver Micha referred to in his lengthy explanation of his quote from Rav Wolbe about hislamdus which references the Rambam?s full statement about a father not teaching his daughter Torah. Minha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. By history, I mean that I know what an obstacle the Ramban?s statement was to those who fought hard ? and in my circles fought successfully ? to get to a stage where the level of Torah taught to women is equivalent, it almost equivalent, to that taught to men. It was hard and it took a long time. The non-O jews That Micha refers to weren?t, I guess, clued into that history and thus could easily slough off the statement. Those of us who are could not, and it has little to do with picking out elements. As for educational techniques, I?ll use an analogy. (As all analogies, this one is imperfect. But I think close enough. Feel free to disagree.) A literature professor is making a point about fiction writing and chooses as his text a section from Huck Finn in which the word ?nigger? is used several times. The use of that word is not relevant to the point being made and the professor makes no comment at all about it. I believe the teacher made a serious error. He didn?t have to spend the lecture on it. But he did have to recognize it and, at the very least, acknowledge there?s an issue about it that he?ll leave fir another day. If you think ignoring the use of that now objectionable word was good teaching in the English class then you should have no problem with the hislamdus post. I think, however, both were errors from an educational standpoint. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 04:41:26 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 07:41:26 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The relevant factoid of the Rambam is that someone who cannot > learn behislamdus, in a reflective way that aims at > internalization, doesn't gain much from learning. A man may be > a metzuveh ve'oseh anyway, perhaps in hopes that someday he has > a good moment. But if a woman isn't metzuvah and cannot learn > behislamdus, there is so little zekhus in learning without > hislamdus, it's not worth the risk of turning it into tiflus. Here's how I relate to this topic: First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's prescription. In sharp contrast, to learn Torah specifically for the yedios, this is learning SHELO lishmah, and is harmless. It's a very low level of the mitzvah even for those who are metzuveh, and those who are non-metzuveh don't need to stay away if it interests them. Of course, it is important for everyone to acquire a particular subset of those yedios, namely those that they need to be a believing shomer mitzvos. But if a non-metzuveh can acquire those yedios in a manner that doesn't risk tiflus (osmosis from the shtetl community, for example) then Mah Tov Umah Na'im. (Footnote: I developed these ideas by noting that so many people refer to Gemara as "real" learning, and how they discount the value of other sorts of learning. For many decades I resented that prejudice, especially since I personally prefer learning halacha and find gemara very difficult. But a few years ago I came upon the idea that perhaps the goal of gemara is not to *teach* us the *reasoning* behind certain things, but more fundamentally, to *train* us *how* to reason. If so, the gemara's methodology (a/k/a Talmud Torah Lishmah in general) would only be effective for certain brains, and might be counterproductive for others.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Oct 18 07:25:25 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 10:25:25 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream Message-ID: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From the OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I bought a tub of vegan ?ice cream?. It is certified OU-D. I know that OUD can either mean that the product contains actual dairy ingredients, or it was made on dairy equipment (this is commonly referred to as DE). If it contains actual dairy, it may not be consumed after meat, while DE products can be eaten after meat but not with meat. I contacted the OU and was told that this tub of ice cream must be treated as actual dairy. How can there be dairy ingredients in the ice cream if it is labeled vegan? A. This particular vegan ice cream is labeled OUD because the flavor is certified dairy by the supervising agency. Apparently, the vegan company assumes that this flavor is DE and not actual dairy. Nonetheless, it is extremely difficult to make this determination because there are many layers to a flavor. A typical flavor is compounded from many ingredients. Some of the ingredients may be other flavors that are also made from multiple ingredients, some of which might also be flavors. An added element of complexity is that the various flavor components may be manufactured by multiple vendors, and each company may have a different hashgacha. When flavors are certified as dairy, the OU often finds it nearly impossible to track down every sub-ingredient and establish whether they are real dairy or DE. For sake of simplicity and because of the uncertainty, the OU tells consumers to treat the product as real dairy. In the case of the vegan ice cream, perhaps the manufacturer checked all the sub-ingredients and determined that they were DE and worthy of a vegan status, but it is possible that the investigation was not thorough and their decision to treat the ice cream as vegan was based on assumptions. Because the investigative process is so difficult, the OU would not rely on the evaluation of the vegan company without independent verification, which we are unable to do. For these reasons, we consider the item to be real dairy. ___________________________________________________________ This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the label of a product to determine its kosher status. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 07:19:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:19:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019141904.GB6560@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 10:14:45AM -0400, Joseph Kaplan via Avodah wrote: > Micha thinks it?s about the ability of ?picking the elements they accept out of the ones > they don't.? That?s not what concerned me at all not do I think that was my failing. Rather, i was concerned with history and educational techniques. You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution. So, either you ignore primary sources that have implications you cannot accept, and lose opportunity to use large chunks of texts as significant as the Rambam. Or, you learn to pick out that which you believe is mesoretic from that which you believe is an erroneous historical artifact. (As for RSW's use of the text, that was back in the 1960s or '70s...) Chodesh Tov! 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 simon.montagu at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 11:04:43 2020 From: simon.montagu at gmail.com (Simon Montagu) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 19:04:43 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] OU Dairy and Vegan Ice Cream In-Reply-To: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <44.82.00463.0805C8F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:46 PM Prof. Levine via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > This email shows that one cannot rely on the list of ingredients on the > label of a product to determine its kosher status. > Without disagreeing with that conclusion, how does the email show it? It shows what the OU *does*, not what one can or cannot do. I remember once buying a sorbet ice imported from the USA in a supermarket in Israel. It was marked OU-D and also had a "kosher parve" stamp from an Israeli BD. I asked the supermarket mashgiach and he said there was no problem eating it after meat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:47:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:47:15 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194715.GA26852@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 07:41:26AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > First and foremost, I believe it is an utter mistake to think that the goal > of Talmud Torah is the yedios that one acquires in the course of learning. > Rather, proper Talmud Torah affects one's neshama in some sort of other, > much more fundamental way. RMB calls it "hislamdus" and "internalization". > Whatever you want to call it, it is nutritious to certain neshamos, and > tiflus to others, and woe to the person who ignores the Physician's > prescription. In the beginning of Nefesh haChaim sha'ar 4, RCV compares learning Torah to dipping in a miqvah. And a person stays tahor even after they're dry. Simiarly Talmud Torah refines the soul, and the value is there even if the the material is forgotten. But I think a core issue in the subsequent split among his talmidim into Yeshivish and Mussar was at least in part -- if not mostly -- over how to undertand this mashal. To the yeshivish, it meant that this happens of its own. Learn gemara and rishonim (eventually: lomdus) and one's neshamah is refined. You don't need to work at self-refinment, this is the power of Torah. In Mussar, these words define what Talmud Torah is. RCV is saying that one doesn't just learn to know, one learns in a way to refine the soul. And thus the whole invention of Tenu'as haMussar. Hislamdus is a a reflective contruction of lamad / limeid. It's an active effort to make Torah "nutritious" to one's neshamah. And RSWolbe sees this idea in the Rambam, not that women's souls inherently can't gain from learning but that the Rambam believed they couldn't engaged in hislamdus, so they simply didn't know how to make a nutritious "dish" out of it. I think your framing is more in the yeshivish model of my little dichotomy, but I am not sure if you intended it to be. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Oct 19 12:49:31 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:49:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Vayechulu in Fri night Maariv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019194931.GB26852@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 09:55:37PM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > This procedure does accomplish the stated goal, but it seems > unnecessarily complicated to me. It would have been simpler to just add > Vayechulu to the Amidah in such cases. Is this idea suggested by anyone? Is > it done by anyone? That only adds seconds to the process. Whereas making a shortened Chazaras haShatz makes a checkpoint, so that nearly everyone is caught up before the group starts VaYekhulu, and the odds of anyone being left behind or others needing to wait to walk home with them is far less. Chodesh Tov! 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 Mon Oct 19 12:59:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 15:59:41 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Analogies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201019195941.GC26852@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:43:49AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > The analogy certainly resonates with me. Whenever I talk about the benefits > I experienced in the spring while the shuls were closed, I make sure to > point out that it is merely a silver lining in the cloud, and it is *not* > the way we are meant to be... I agree intellectually, but in practice, it feels like I am getting more out of my davening at home, at my own pace, saying the things loud that I want to say loud, picking my tunes, etc... > But if you are trying to quantify a specific prioritization level for > thinking about this, I believe the search to be fultile. Suffice it to say > that it is important; to ask *how* important is like trying to prioritize a > tzedaka that you identify with very closely even though it is > geographically distant versus one that merely happens to be very local. The > question does have an answer, but you won't find it with mathematics. There is also another issue with prioritizing tzedaqah... You can somehow find more money to give when you are more moved by the cause. After all, there is a good deal of elasticity to the question of how much money we need to live. So, telling everyone to strictly follow rules like aniyei irekha qodmin will end up reducing total giving. To some extent these are rules one needs to learn to make one's emotional priorities, and not necessarily always to implement before reaching that point. Thus brining me back to my first comment... Except in the case of minyan, there is a hard halachic call to choose minyan over not. Maybe one could use davening kevasiqin to halachically justify "not" if there is enough of an emotional difference. Chodesh Tov! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The first step towards getting somewhere is http://www.aishdas.org/asp to decide that you are not going Author: Widen Your Tent to stay where you are. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - JP Morgan From cbkaufman at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 14:04:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 16:04:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: This is something that Jews don?t know (at least no one that I?ve asked) and don?t realize that they don?t know and don?t care. The Torah speaks of many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. If it?s just deep oceans, then how do we explain the 2nd pasuk in the Torah? Hashem hovered over the ocean surface but about 100 meters down it gets dark so we start to call it The Tahom? Is it every underground water system that opens into a spring? But we are told that one of the four rivers flows underground until it comes out in Africa. That isn?t called The Tahom. It?s just an underground river. Why is this thing so common in Tanach and Chanala as there was one in every town, and we don?t know what it is, nor even give a second thought? Regardless of its metaphorical meaning regarding the depth of our soul. Chaimbaruch Kaufman I -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 20 05:53:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:53:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Sugar can be processed with animal bones Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have heard that sugar can be processed with animal bones. Is this true? Is this a Kashrus concern? A. Incinerated animal bones (known as bone char) are used as a filtering aid for sugar to remove unwanted color. Since the bones are completely burned, they are not edible even for a dog (aino ro?ui liachilas kelev), and no longer have a non-kosher status. In truth, non-kosher animal bones can be used for filtering even if they have not been burnt. Although the Rambam (Hilchos Maachalos Assuros 4:18) writes that one may not eat bones from a non-kosher animal, Shulchan Aruch (YD 99:1) writes that if kosher food was cooked together with non-kosher bones (that have no marrow), the food remains kosher. This is because bones have no taste which would be imparted to the food. Although one might assume that this is only permitted bidieved (after the fact) but would not be allowed lichatchila, that is not correct. Sefer Panim Me?iros (3:33) writes that one may make utensils (e.g. spoons, ladles) from the bones of non-kosher animals and there is no concern, since bones do not impart taste. In our situation, the bones are filters and do not become part of the sugar, and there is no kashrus concern for the two reasons cited above. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From penkap at panix.com Tue Oct 20 07:27:27 2020 From: penkap at panix.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Shemini Atzeres as a time for Hislamdus Message-ID: <9CE6D00B-DBF7-460B-92D8-766040B0DEE0@panix.com> Micha, responding to my comment on referring to the Rambam?s discussion of not teaching Torah to women in a post about hislamdus, wrote: ? You cannot just edit the Yad. Once you edit primary texts, they aren't primary anymore. You are no longer an evolution of the tradition, but a revolution.? I agree, of course. But nowhere did I suggest or imply that any text should be edited. Indeed, in my analogy to the difficult Twain text I said that a good teacher would at the very least acknowledge the difficulty even if they don?t deal with it in that particular discussion. That?s all I wanted Micha to do. Not ?edit? (a word I never used or, quite frankly, thought about in this discussion) but at least acknowledge (if not discuss). I never mind anyone disagreement with anything I say or write. But please don?t disagree with me about things I didn?t say. Joseph Sent from my iPhone From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 20 14:33:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:33:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:04:52PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > This is something that Jews don't know (at least no one that I've asked) > and don't realize that they don't know and don't care. The Torah speaks of > many geological structures that we are familiar with, e.g. har/mountains, > yam/sea, major/river.... but the Torah, in many places mentions The Tahom > as if everyone is familiar with it but no one can define it precisely like > we can a mountain, river, or seas which we can point at. In Sumaerian and early Babylonian religion, Tiamet, sometimes Tihamat, is the goddess of the primeval ocean. The name is generally considered a cognate of the Hebrew "tehom". /THM/ is also the Ugaritic word for the Great Deep. And in Akkadian, "tamtu" -- which is where "Tiamet", without the "h" is coming from. We also have the word "tehomos", which implies that the tehom does not remain a unique singular thing. "Qaf'u tehomos beleiv yam". Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. Also notable: it's the miqvah mayim which is called yam. Not the mayim. The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in "mayim bayamim". Which frees up a possible meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 18:08:57 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Micha, (It?s a good thing I proofread what I write, otherwise spell check would have addressed this to Mocha) Thank you for that fascinating information. I never saw that connection to Bavel; and I?ve looked. (The 12th Planet?) >>Seems to me The Tehom was the single body of water before HQBH introduced > yabashah, and was split into miqvei mayim called yamim. > > Then what is called Tahom after mikvei mayim? > >>The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in > "mayim bayamim". Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say ?...all of the water in the sea.? and still sea doesn?t mean seabed. However, a friend of mine says that Rashi says (on Tahom in that 2nd pasuk in Bereishis) that it the water just above the seabed ?mayim al hayabasha?. First, I believe that is incorrect; and rather means lakes and such that But also, what would that even mean? ?Darkness was on the seabed?? Technically speaking it is dark down there, but what is the Torah telling us with that? And the Tahom is also accessible inland, eg. the Tahom under the Even HaShisiyah that threatened to drown the world until Dovid HaMelech threw the Shem Hashem into it. This leads to a broader aspect of Tahom. The yesodos of the world are mayim, aish, ruach, and earth. Does mayim refer to all liquids? If so, then the idea of earth Rokah on the mayim makes sense, in that land does float on liquid rock. Otherwise, where is land floating on water, and moreover, what are we making bracha on, every morning? Can the Tahom be, or even just include, the Earth?s molten core? Which frees up a possibles meaning to be applied to "tehom". After day 2, > the "depths" (as per the cognates) of a sea or ocean. > > But again, is the pasuk saying that the Ruach H? is above the water and a little ways under that water it gets dark? > > Chaimbaruch -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 04:26:50 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:26:50 +0300 Subject: [Avodah] Toho VaVohu Message-ID: R' Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer asked: > I heard somewhere this week that Null and Void is a translation of > Tohu and Vohu. Has anyone else ever seen or heard this? Wish I > could remember from whom I heard it! That's how we learnt it in Kita Alef (or in the Adas Yeshurun Cheder - or both) in Johannesburg 50 years ago. The closest I could find in my bookshelf is in the Silberman Chumash that has it as Desolate and Void. Never occurred to me until now that Null and Void isn't The translation of Tohu vaVohu. Oh well, live & learn. - Danny From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 20 16:02:20 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 23:02:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: Message-ID: From a book review: You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda." This enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage earners out in the workforce. Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role of Shevet Levi-"a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with a minimum of interaction with the material world." These years are "the stratum [that] becomes the core of our being." The subsequent years in the work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other shevatim-"to know our mission in life and to realize it." Such missions must be solidly within the framework of osek b'yishuvo shel olam-"the constructive building and enhancement of the world." From me: Certainly one model-One might argue that looking ahead while one is in Yeshiva would allow a stronger foundation for the subsequent years (e.g. understanding real world trade-offs while studying theoretical paradigms, learning skills which will make one more effective in their ultimate mission, gathering lenses and facts which can force multipliers in one's learning). This differentiation has some very practical implications. (Besides the psychological considerations of possible feelings about having to leave the Yeshiva) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Tue Oct 20 19:46:35 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared by Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to be known through his Egyptian name. Why? The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allan.engel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 07:37:52 2020 From: allan.engel at gmail.com (allan.engel at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:37:52 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do you understand this? How, precisely? On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 12:36, Brent Kaufman via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > > While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of > the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Oct 21 14:25:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 17:25:04 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201021212504.GA12928@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 09:46:35PM -0500, Brent Kaufman wrote: > Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone > give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? Of the ones we know translations for, only Tammuz. Warach Dumuzu means "the month of [the god] Tammuz". This month, Warach Samnu, which becomes Marcheshvan when mem and yud/vav swap during the borrowing, simply means "8th month". > Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the > story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) ... I assume these were the names they were called by in the royal court. Like the way the Babylonians decided to call Chananiah, Mishael & Azariah by the names Shadrakh, Meishakh, and Aved-Nego And the use of Pesachyah's (?) and Hadasah's royal identities rather than their Jewish ones is important to a point the megillah is trying to make. You are effectively asking what that point is, but while I don't know, I can tackle your first question. The Ramban, R Bachya, Abarbanel (all on Shemos 12:22) and the Iaqim (3:16) give variants of the idea that we use the Babylonian names in order to commemorate our ge'ulah from Bavel. Just as the original month numbers commemorate our ge'ulah from Mitzrayim. Which has me wondering if after the next ge'ulah Marcheshvan will be called October. (Which also means "8th month", and it was 8th before Jan & Feb were inserted at the start of the year*.) This would fit the pattern of the two previous returns to EY. BUT, the Babylonian calendar really matches ours -- months are based on the actual moon, and they had leap months. In fact, it was during our stay in Bavel that they shifted from doubling Ululu (Ellul) to doubling Addaru. Just like us. The Gregorian "months" of 30 or 31 (or 28) days don't line up one-to-one with ours the same. The whole thing about Babylonian month names reminded me of a story R Henoch Teller tells about a BT who was feeling awkward in the miqvah. On his arm, usually under his sleeve, was a tattoo that he got back when living a very different lifestyle. An older gentleman saw how he was holding his towel, angling his arm to always be near the wall, and otherwise avoid it being scene. The older man showed him his arm, which (as you knew was coming) had a very different kind of tattoo on it. "You see this? I don't hide it. I wear it with pride. It reminds me of where I once was, and how far I have come." Expanding on what those rishonim write, that's what the Babylonian month names mean to me. Few chose to come back to Israel, and of those who did, a shocking number were intermarried. Assimilation was commonplace. But then Hashem took us out of Bavel. But we kept the month names to remember when we used them caring about who Demuzi was supposed to have been. (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 days per "year".) Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger If you're going through hell http://www.aishdas.org/asp keep going. Author: Widen Your Tent - Winston Churchill - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 14:50:44 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 16:50:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: wrote: > Do you understand this? How, precisely? > > I didn?t mean that I understand what those tikunim are. I just meant that > I am ?aware? that that is the way the Ari?zal usually explains similar > things. > >> -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 21 14:32:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 21:32:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: Please see the article from Tradition at https://traditiononline.org/halakha-approaches-the-covid-19-vaccine/#easy-footnote-24-13392 [https://traditiononline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/coronavirus-vaccine.jpg] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine ? Tradition Online Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 VaccineSharon Galper Grossman & Shamai GrossmanRachel tried to reason with the clerk at the check-in counter. She explained that she had delayed vaccinating herself and her children because she did not want to be the first to receive a new vaccine, especiall traditiononline.org Conclusion Halakha permits, encourages, and likely even obligates Rachel to get a COVID-19 vaccination for herself and her children in order to protect herself and others from infection, help create herd immunity, and end the pandemic. Similarly, schools and communities should require a COVID-19 vaccination despite parents? reluctance. We believe that failure to vaccinate violates the prohibition to stand idly by another?s blood. We hope that a safe and effective vaccine will be developed and disseminated in the very near future. It is our best hope to alleviate the worldwide suffering and to arrest the horrific death toll brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. When it does arrive, we feel that it is morally obligatory and halakhically mandated that people accept the vaccine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Oct 21 09:13:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 12:13:08 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The undesirability of lasting halachic machlokess Message-ID: Reviewing Dynamics of Dispute, I found a mistake I made on page 184. My application of the statement about "as difficult as the day the Golden Calf was made," which I cited in the name of the Halachois Gedolos, is incorrectly applied to the breaking out of the phenomenon of machlokess between Beis Hillel and Beis Shammai. Actually, it's a reference to the situation the nation found itself in when Hillel was forced to admit defeat to Shammai in a machlokess over whether to institute a certain gezeyra. Furthermore, although the Halachos Gedolos does list 7 Adar as a fast day because "Besi Hillel and Beis Shammai had a machlokess on that day," it does not say the piece about the Golden Calf. On the other hand, Teshuvas HaGeonim (Harkavey) #250 does. One may even argue that the fast was on account of the humiliation of Beis Hillel regarding that particular machlokess, and not because of the existence of machlokess per se. Nevertheless, other citations I bring still support the thesis that the existence of lasting machlokess was considered undesirable, and other sources can be added. I am eager to send updates of corrections and comments to anyone who would send me his email address. Zvi Lampel at gmail dot com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Thu Oct 22 22:36:56 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 01:36:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] R' Nachman Bulman on Antisemitism Message-ID: I thought the chevra might like to read this piece from R' Bulman that I recently shared with the Agudah's mailing list (also noting that R' Bulman is father of listmember R'nTK). From the JO, 1964. A long read, but worth it, IMHO. Here's the link: https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/JO-Antisemitism-and-the-Jewish-Response.pdf KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:41:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:41:56 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Two Rainbows Message-ID: <20201023164156.GA18737@aishdas.org> An interesting tidbit from the Seforno on Ber' 9:13 "vehaysa le'os beris": "And it will be as a covenental sign: When the rainbow is double. The scientific experts grew tired of trying to give a ta'am for the order of the color of the secondary rainbow, which is the reverse of the order of the colors in the primary, usual, rainbow. It will be a sign to the righteous of the generation that their generation is guilty. As when it says [Kesuvos 77b; about truly righteous Levites] never seeing a rainbow in their entire lifetimes. So that [the righteous] will pray, rebuke others, and teach the nation wisdom. So, according to the Seforno, the rainbow that Chazal talk about being a bad sign is not the usual rainbow, but the second of a doubled rainbow. The Seforno emphasizes the fact that the colors are reversed. A primary rainbow has red on the top, outer, curve, and violet on the bottom, inner, one. A secondary rainbow is about it some distance -- red on the inside curve (nearest the red of the primary) and violet on the outside. See the picture at https://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/climate-weather/atmospheric/double-rainbows-rare.htm Also there is the scientific explanation that the Natural Philosophers of the Seforno's day apparently despaired of finding. I don't know why the Seforno mentions the reversed color sequence. Maybe he considers it a significant part of the symbol. But in any case, it solves a problem: We make the berakhah of Oseh Maaseh Bereishis on the primary rainbow, which is indeed an awe-inspiring and positive thing to see. A secondary rainbow is rare and therefore more exciting. (Ask Hungrybear9562, Paul Vasquez, whose excitement about seeing a "double rainbow" in Yosemite National Park become a viral video.) But according to Seforno, this reaction is ironic. Seeing a rare double rainbow is a *bad* thing. But it's not the phonemonon the berakhah is made on. :-)BBii! -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 sholom at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 09:36:51 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:36:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question Message-ID: What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? (In practical usage -- I'm involved in getting an eruv built -- it seems like it's pretty much the same, except that gud asik seems to be reserved for davka a mechitza mamash. Is there anything more to it than that?) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 23 09:14:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 16:14:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one add sugar to hot tea on Shabbos? A. If food was fully cooked before Shabbos and then cooled down, may it be recooked again on Shabbos? In the language of the Talmud, do we say, Yesh bishul achar bishul (there is cooking after cooking), or Ain bishul achar bishul (there is no cooking after cooking). The Shulchan Aruch makes a distinction between recooking a dry food and a liquid. If a dry item was fully cooked, there is no prohibition to recook it again on Shabbos, but it is prohibited to recook a liquid that cooled down. This does not mean that one may place a dry cooked food on the fire. Though there is no Biblical prohibition of bishul when reheating a dry food, there are nonetheless Rabbinic injunctions which apply, either because one might adjust the flame or because it has the appearance of cooking. However, one is permitted to place a dry fully cooked food into a boiling pot of water that has been removed from the fire. Once the pot is off the stove, there is no concern that one might adjust the flame, and since there is no fire, it does not appear as though raw food is being cooked. Granulated sugar is extracted via a cooking process. Since sugar is a dry food, one would assume that it should be permitted to add sugar to a pot of boiling water that is off the fire. However, the Mishnah Berurah (318:71) cites the Sharei Teshuva that since sugar dissolves when placed in hot water, lichatchila we view sugar as a liquid. As such, sugar should not be added to a kli rishon (a pot that was on the fire), nor may one pour hot water onto sugar. Instead, one should first pour the hot water into a cup and then it is permissible to add the sugar. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Oct 23 14:03:17 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:03:17 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the floor. A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an existing piect of wall that is near the top. Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a "lip" for a gud akhis. I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. Someone wrote: Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about here repeatedly: I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking at the wrong set of realia. Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in the wall. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own worth, http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Fri Oct 23 10:38:21 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 17:38:21 +0000 (WET DST) Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Oct 23, 2020 02:04:07 pm Message-ID: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > (* I know many of you were under the impression the two added months > are Jul and Aug, but really they were renamings of Quintilis and > Sextilis. Jan and Feb were added later. In Julian and Augustus's > era, Rome had a decimal system -- 10 months for a total of only 304 > days per "year".) > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Everyone has a decimal system; nevertheless, even people who did not engage in agriculture, or who lived in equatorial regions without pronounced seasons, knew what a solar year was, and that it was not 10 months long. March was originally the first month, February the last month (although that was already ancient history by the time of the Julian reforms), but the Romans did not have a 10-month year, that notion is, as I said, preposterous. Not even Danton and Robespierre would think of doing something so idiotic. The Julian reforms involved eliminating the lunar month as a unit of time, replacing it with slightly longer units with no astronimical significance (except that they did not lengthen February, which they considered unlucky, beyond the length of a lunar month). The reason for the Julian reforms is that the term of political offices in ancient Rome was one year. The pontifex maximus would decide whether a year should have 12 months or 13 months, and, instead of making the decision for sound agriculture or meteorological reasons,if the pontifex maximus was allied with the people in power, he would give them an extra month, and if he was not allied with the people in power, he would not give them an extra month. The calendar thus ceased to track the solar year, rendering it useless. The Julian reforms fixed the calendar and took away the power of the pontifex maximus to manipulate it, but at the cost of eliminating lunar months as a unit of measurement. As always, politics messes everything up, then as now. 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 micha at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 17:36:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 20:36:50 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] 304 Days Per Year In-Reply-To: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16034927010.bc8fe.85610@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20201025003650.GB20517@aishdas.org> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 05:38:21PM +0000, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: > I don't know that this reply belongs on Avodah -- except insofar as > the Torah requires us not to make things up and then proclaim them > publicly to be true -- but this is preposterous. The Romans did not > aggregate 10 months into a "year" because they had a decimal system. Take it up with the Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/calendar/The-early-Roman-calendar The early Roman calendar This originated as a local calendar in the city of [92]Rome, supposedly drawn up by [93]Romulus some seven or eight centuries before the Christian [94]era, or Common Era. The year began in March and consisted of 10 months, six of 30 days and four of 31 days, making a total of 304 days: it ended in December, to be followed by what seems to have been an uncounted [95]winter gap. [96]Numa Pompilius, according to tradition the second king of Rome (715?-673? bce), is supposed to have added two extra months, [97]January and [98]February, to fill the gap and to have increased the total number of days by 50, making 354. To obtain sufficient days for his new months, he is then said to have deducted one day from the 30-day months, thus having 56 days to divide between January and February. But since the Romans had, or had developed, a superstitious dread of even numbers, January was given an extra day; February was still left with an even number of days, but as that [99]month was given over to the infernal gods, this was considered appropriate. The system allowed the year of 12 months to have 355 days, an uneven number. ... Or this page from Prof James Grout (U Chicago) Encylopedia Romana, which offers dates, details, and primary sources: https://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/romancalendar.html Gut Voch! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From sholom at aishdas.org Sat Oct 24 19:04:12 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2020 22:04:12 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Yes, thank you, I did intend to write gud achis. Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). (And thanks for repeating your "why" of "halacha vs reality"!) -- Sholom On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 12:36:51PM -0400, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > > What's the difference between "gud asik" and "pi tikra yored v'soseim" ? > > A gud asiq "pulling upward" an existing piece of wall that is near the > floor. > > A gud akhis, which is what I think you meant, is "pulling downward" an > existing piect of wall that is near the top. > > Pi tiqra is treating the end of a roof as defining the end of the space, > thereby implying a wall. So, gud akhis doesn't involve the space being > covered, and pi tiqra doesn't require the edge of the roof having a > "lip" for a gud akhis. > > I recently answered on FB something about the "why" of all this. Since > we're touching the subject, I'll see what people here think. > > Someone wrote: > Has anyone read an article on why halacha operates with concepts > outside of physical reality? For example the concepts of lavod, > Barayrah, ...? Did surrounding cultures have these ideas (such as > (legal) Halachic reality versus objective reality)? > > My reply, drawing from a philosphy of halakhah that I posted about > here repeatedly: > I would say, before dealing with your question, that you are looking > at the wrong set of realia. > > Halakhah is a tool for refining people. Therefore its "facts" are > human experiences, not objective realities. To take your example > of lavud: If something is enough of a wall to feel like it defines > a space, it defines a space. And if the soul / character shaping > experience requires a defined space, feeling like you're "in" > something, we wouldn't care about whether or not there is a gap in > the wall. > > :-)BBii! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger If a person does not recognize one's own > worth, > http://www.aishdas.org/asp how can he appreciate the worth of another? > Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Yaakov Yosef of Polnoye, > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF author of Toldos Yaakov Yosef > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at daasbooks.com Sun Oct 25 03:20:31 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 06:20:31 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months Message-ID: Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) But it seems to me that he likely called himself Moshe, and therefore when Hashem addresses him for the first time (at the Bush), He is teaching us derech eretz ? namely, call a person what they call themselves. Regarding the months is an interesting question because Chazal use those names. You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names for the week days. On 10/23/20, 5:04 PM, "avodah-bounces at lists.aishdas.org on behalf of avodah-request at lists.aishdas.org" wrote: >Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 21:46:35 -0500 >From: Brent Kaufman >To: Micha Berger >Cc: The Avodah Torah Discussion Group >Subject: [Avodah] Names of Months >Message-ID: > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Now that the ancient pantheons of gods have been brought up, can anyone >give an explanation for why the we name our months after Babylonian gods? > >Why does Megilas Esther change the Hebrew names of the 2 heroes of the >story to those of Babylonian gods? (marduch and ishtar) And why did the >Torah choose, for our greatest Navi and teacher, an Egyptian name shared >by >Paro himself- Ra Musa or Ra mes; the noun ?ms? meaning born, the first >syllable being the name of their sun god, or born of ra. >I mean, Moshe Rabbeinu had ten fine Yidishe names, yet HKBH wants him to >be >known through his Egyptian name. Why? >The Torah has taught us to be a very insular people, using the names of >avodos zaros is even prohibited by Halacha. > >While I understand that these things bring tikunim to certain aspects of >the world, I am asking on a more pshat level. > > From micha at aishdas.org Sun Oct 25 10:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 13:51:51 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of the > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend downward > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Oct 25 09:58:31 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 16:58:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: The following if from RSRH's commentary on Bereishis 6 9 These are the products of Noach. Noach, a righteous man, was morally pure in his times: Noach walked with God. A Tzadik is one who gives everyone and everything their due. A Tzadik is objective toward everything; he looks at everything from the standpoint of his duty, and not from the standpoint of his own personal interests. The primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; When I once related this to someone while walking home from shul he said, "There is no mention of piety." I let this comment go, but I should have replied, "This IS piety." See http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%206%20Fried.pdf RSRH also writes on this pasuk Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention to his own personality. In the case of derech , however, the aim is the satisfaction of one's self and the perfection of one's personality, which, accordingly, includes also the physical aspirations. Tamim derech is one who remains pure even when satisfying his physical aspirations. Later on in his commentary on this pasuk Rabbiner Hirsch writes, "It is far more difficult to remain morally pure in an age of immorality than to remain honest in an age of dishonesty." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Oct 25 05:55:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 08:55:58 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com> The article and its approach are incredibly upsetting. With a clear agenda to justify mandated covid vaccination. The authors attempt to bring proof from previous poskim on the smallpox vaccine. I waited in vain for the authors to point out that clearly covid and smallpox are NOT comparable, because of their vastly different morbidity rates. The smallpox vaccine was mandated because of the small risk to vaccination, vs the large risk to not vaccinating. Covid is a risk for some (especially with preexisting issues), but not in general for the average person. (it is true that a tiny minority of younger/healthy people have strong (and even fatal) reactions, but the number of these people is v small) Do the authors propose mandated flu vaccination?! I assume not, because they understand there is a difference between flu and smallpox. And so to wrt covid for the average person. (covid vaccination may be advised for the elderly and those more at risk) It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to claim safety) for a population that does not need it. From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Oct 26 07:00:34 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 14:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: Halakha Approaches the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: <059101d6aace$2f7eeac0$8e7cc040$@touchlogic.com>, Message-ID: <8EED11F0-EC9C-448D-81C9-1F3743545D65@segalco.com> > ? > It is against halacha to demand/propose a mandated administration of a > vaccination with unproven long term effects (and with government bias to > claim safety) for a population that does not need it. > //////// For whom is against halacha? Local secular authorities? American authorities? Exactly which Halacka is it against? Who makes the determination concerning whether a population needs it or not? Isn?t it always the case that long-term effects are unproven until people use it and the long-term passes :-) > > Kt Joel rich > THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Oct 27 08:54:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:54:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] What Is Genuine Chassidic Jewishness? Message-ID: The following is from Rav Dr. Joseph Breuer's essay Our Way that appears in the volume A Unique Perspective: Rav Breuer's Essays 1914 - 1973: Genuine Chassidic Jewishness strives for Chassidus, which in itself is a lofty achievement on the ethical ladder which the Yehudi must attempt to climb. This is demonstrated for us by R. Pinchas ben Yair (Avodah Zarah 20b): Our highest duty is Torah and its study; this leads to carefulness which in turn leads to active striving; to guiltlessness; to purity; to holiness; to modesty; to the fear of sin; and, finally, to Chassidus. Accordingly, a Chassid is a Jew who gives himself in limitless love to the DivineWill and its realization, and to whom the welfare of his fellowmen constitutes the highest source of satisfaction (see Chorev, Ch. 14). Thus, in the Talmudic era, the title ?Chassid? was a mark of highest distinction ? and this is what it should be today. The so-called Chassid who confines his Avodah to prayer does not deserve this title, as this ?Avodah of the heart? does not call him to the Avodah of life where he must practice and apply the precepts of Chassidus. He does not deserve this title if he is particular regarding the kashrus of his food but fails to apply the precepts of conscientiousness and honesty to his business dealings. He does not deserve this title if his social life is not permeated by love and deep interest in the welfare of his fellowmen; if he does not shun quarreling, envy or even abominable Loshon Hara; if he does not earnestly strive to acquire those Midos for which Rav Hirsch (in his Chorev) calls so eloquently. Certainly the mere exhibition of a certain type of clothing or the type of beard worn or even the adornment of long sideburns does not entitle the bearer to the title of honor?Chassid. These may be marks of distinction ? but they must be earned to be deserved. Even study of the Zohar does not necessarily signify the attainment of Chassidus. If this were so, only a few chosen ones would be eligible. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Oct 27 14:41:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:41:39 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] The Definition of a Tzadik In-Reply-To: References: <88.F1.00463.958A59F5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201027214139.GB4626@aishdas.org> On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 04:58:31PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > The > primary meaning of Tzedek is social justice; Justice, yes, but social justice? Even taking out assumptions now associated with that idiom, I am not sure tzedaq refers to societal-level justice more than the one-on-one kind. After all, "tzedeq tzedeq tirdof" is a command to a litigant to make a point of looking for an honest court. (Sanhedrin 32, Sifrei, Rashi Devarim 16:20) And the context in Devarim is right after telling the court not to favor one litigant nor o take bribes. It's not an order to the king, or to the Sanhedrin > RSRH also writes on this pasuk [Bereishis 6:9] >> Tamim, on the other hand, is usually construed with halach and >> derech. The primary meaning of derech is a person's development toward >> the perfection of his own personality, his gradual progression from >> step to step. The Tzadik who acts and performs deeds pays no attention >> to his own personality.... Then how did they become a tzadiq? I don't see how the 2nd and 3rd sentences work together. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Oct 27 16:24:31 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 23:24:31 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana Message-ID: Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot). F Scott Fitzgerald said, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." So how can we experience the pure joy of a coronation at the same time that we feel the dread of judgement day? But now I realize that I had really heard a possible answer many decades ago from Rav Nissan Alpert ZT"L. Everyone questions why on Pesach there is no blessing over saying the Haggadah, after all we are completing the mitzvah of sippur yetziat mitzrayim. Rav Alpert explained that we need to consider the text of a bracha which is usually of the form, "elokeinu MELECH haolam, asher kidshanu bmitzvotav VTZIVANU". This text implies that before there can be a commandment, there must be an accepted commander. Since on Pesach we are re-experiencing the exodus in which we accepted the commander, we cannot say a blessing before such an acceptance. I think this applies on Rosh Hashanah as well. It is the very act of accepting HKB"H as our king that engenders the fear of the Yom Hadin. If we don't perceive authority, we have no reason to fear. It's only once we accept that authority that we can experience our responsibility to that authority. Thus both feelings are caused by the same acceptance. We are thrilled by the ein od mlvado nature of our unique relationship with HKB"H even at the same time as we feel the weight of our assumed responsibility. Reactions? Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 09:20:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:20:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Danger of Being Too Isolated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The following is from the new translation of RSRH's commentary on the Chumash. Dare one suggest that Chareidi and Chassidic educators keep this in mind when dealing with their students? YL Bereishis 20:1 Avraham journeyed forth from there to the south country and settled between Kadesh and Shur, and he sojourned in Gerar. Avraham settled (i.e., took up permanent residence) between Kadesh and Shur, but he also sojourned (i.e., took up temporary residence) in Gerar. What were the reasons for these two contrasting actions? We have seen that, initially, Avraham sought to isolate himself and his household from the atmosphere and society of the cities. For this reason he first settled in the desolate south, and only gradually established ties with the cities, finally settling among his allies, Aner, Eshkol, and Mamre, who related to him with respect and esteem. Now we see him, in his waning years, returning to the south. He settles between Kadesh and Shur, in an isolated, uninhabited area near the wilderness of Shur, which is known as a complete wasteland. At the same time, however, he seeks contact with city life and occasionally stays in Gerar, the capital of the Philistine kings. Unless we are totally mistaken, we would venture to say that what prompted Avraham and Sarah to change their place of residence was the expectation of the imminent birth of their son. A Yitzchak should be educated in isolation, far removed from any negative influence. On the other hand, complete isolation, which denies the student all contact with people who think differently and whose aims and way of life differ from his own, is a dangerous educational mistake. A young person who has never seen a way of life other than that of his parents, never had an opportunity to compare his parents? lifestyle with that of others, and never learned to appreciate the moral contrast between the two, will never learn to value, respect and hold fast to the ways his parents have taught him. He will surely fall victim to outside influences at his first encounter with them, just as one who fears the fresh air and closets himself in his room can be sure of catching cold as soon as he goes outdoors. Avraham?s son, the future bearer of Avraham?s heritage, should, from time to time, enter the world that is alien to the spirit of Avraham. There he can evaluate opposing ideas and strengthen himself to keep to the ways of Avraham in a world that is opposed to them. For this purpose Avraham chooses the capital of a Philistine prince. In the land of the Philistines the degeneracy had apparently not spread to the extent that it had reached in Canaan; hence the Philistines were not subject to the destruction decreed upon their Emorite neighbors. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Oct 28 05:35:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 12:35:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is tzar baalei chayim (the restriction against causing pain to animals) a Biblical or Rabbinic prohibition? A. The position of most major Rishonim is that needlessly causing pain to animals is Biblically prohibited. This is the opinion of the Rif, Rosh and Rashba. Some maintain that according to the Rambam, tzar baalei chayim is Rabbinically prohibited. Shulchan Aruch (OC 305:19) and Rema (CM 272:9) both agree that tzar baalei chayim is a Torah prohibition. What is the Biblical source for tzar baalei chayim? Most Rishonim infer this from the mitzvah of ?prikah? (the requirement to help unload an animal in distress). However, the Meiri (Baba Metzia 32b) derives tzar baalei chayim from the prohibition of muzzling an animal while it works (Devarim 25:4), and the Hagos Chasam Sofer (Baba Metzia 36b) writes that it is based on the pasuk ? and His compassion is on all His creations? (Tehilim 145:9). In general, there is no halachic difference if tzar baalei chayim is a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition, as either way, it is strictly prohibited. However, poskim point out one area where this issue is relevant. Shulchan Aruch Harav (305:29) writes, although it is prohibited to milk a cow on Shabbos, one may ask a non-Jew to do so. The justification is that if a cow is not milked for 24 hours, the animal will suffer much pain. Since the Shulchan Aruch rules that tzar baalei chayim is a Biblical prohibition, the Torah imperative overrides the Rabbinic injunction of amira lo?akum (the prohibition against asking a non-Jew to perform melacha on Shabbos). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From torahweb at torahweb.org Wed Oct 28 17:38:59 2020 From: torahweb at torahweb.org (torahweb at torahweb.org) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 20:38:59 -0400 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] Rabbi Mayer Twersky - Do Not Be Exceedingly Righteous Message-ID: <24994a8c88ee4a5e49e25e5a6a03fd9d@torahweb.org> (I had to transliterate for the purposes of the digest. They are kept in brackets. -micha) DO NOT BE EXCEEDINGLY RIGHTEOUS (Koheles 7:16) Rabbi Mayer Twersky An adapted, English version of [Al Tehi Tzadiq Harbei], published 7 Cheshvan 5781 / 25 October 2020 I For the past months within several of our communities we have been confronted by a strange, dissonant reality. * On the one hand, we are scrupulously observant, and yet, on the other hand, shockingly contemptuous of the cardinal [mitzvah] to safeguard life ([venishmartem me'od lenafshoseikhem]). * As multifariously evidenced both on a collective, communal level as well as a personal, individual level, we are extraordinarily kind and compassionate. And yet, we have been acting with extreme cruelty in transmitting a potentially lethal virus to each other with predictably catastrophic consequences. * We are committed to protecting the honor of Heaven ([kavod Shamayim]) and yet, time and time again, our contempt for public health measures has greatly profaned the honor of Heaven ([chilul hasheim]). Who would have thought that such a contradiction fraught scenario could possibly exist? And yet, indisputably, this scenario prevails in several of our communities. II Let us present and reflect upon one cause (inter alia) of this dissonant reality. (Human behavior, like humans themselves, is complex, and we ought to steer clear of reductionism.) "Human nature is such... that a person emulates his fellow citizens" (Rambam, Hilchos De'os 6:1). "It is prohibited to adopt gentile practices or emulate their ways... Rather a Jew should stand apart from them, distinguished in his dress and conduct, just as he stands apart in his knowledge and character, as the Torah states, 'I have set you apart from the nations'" (ibid. Hilchos Avoda Zara 11:1). Throughout the millennia we have made a consistent, concerted effort to overcome susceptibility to negative influences, thereby retaining our singular identity and remaining a distinct, unique people. In recent decades, however, in several of our communities we have adopted a greatly exaggerated stance. A Weltanschauung has emerged and crystalized which indiscriminately rejects and contemptuously dismisses the outside world in toto. Our motivation is noble, but our actions are decidedly ignoble. This extreme Weltanschauung with its intellectual xenophobia embellishes the Torah's imperative of separateness. In embellishing, we diminish, undermine, and imperil ([kol hamosif goreia]). Contempt and hatred inevitably result in extreme, anomalous behavior ([sin'ah meqalqeles es hashurah; Rashi, Bamidbar 22:21, Sanhedrin 105b). The painful, sacrilegious, dissonant reality we have experienced these past months results from entrenched, indiscriminate contempt and blind, self-destructive hatred. As previously discussed, there is vital need for discriminating, targeted rejection of outside intellectual and cultural currents. Undoubtedly, most of contemporary society's intellectual and cultural output is anathema and, as such, must be blocked and rejected. Additionally, there is room for legitimate difference of opinion regarding a small percentage of society's intellectual output. But there is equally vital, halachic need to "accept truth from whomever speaks it" (Rambam, introduction to Eight Chapters). Rejection of societal culture must be discriminating because Halachah is discriminating; while it unequivocally rejects that which is antithetical, it unabashedly welcomes, even seeks, certain elements of [chokhmah] even when they emanate from the outside world. Case in point: Halachah recognizes, respects and relies upon medical knowledge and opinion from the outside world. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 618:1.) And yet, in clear, indefensible violation of Halachah, we have (in several of our communities) throughout the pandemic ignored and rejected medical science, its warnings and protocols. In so doing we have acted against our own halachic principles; cruelly inflicted suffering and death upon ourselves; and betrayed our most sacred trust of [kavod Shemayim]. This profoundly anomalous, self-contradictory, self-destructive behavior has resulted from the toxic hatred and exaggerated, indiscriminate contempt for the outside world. An even more pronounced form of the self-contradiction has been rejecting medical knowledge even when shared by Torah observant medical health professionals who otherwise are highly respected within our communities. All this rejection and negativity despite the fact that we ourselves, in other medical contexts, seek the best medical treatment available. Apparently, when the initiative is ours, we embrace medical knowledge from the outside world. But when we perceive the initiative as coming from the outside, our visceral contempt self-destructively prevails. Plagued by a mindset of contempt and suspicion, we also become especially susceptible to misinformation, deception and falsehood cynically propagated to contradict and erode confidence in medical knowledge and guidelines. Our association with such primitivity and perversion adds yet another dimension to the terrible [chilul hasheim]. In this context we are unavoidably reminded of the measles outbreak within small segments of some of our communities due to lack of vaccination. III Currently, within our aforementioned communities, there are calls for compliance with public health protocols and guidelines. And yet the distortion of Torah and the [chilul hasheim] continue unabated. The reason being, that we do not attribute the need for compliance with the Torah's zealous, proactive, preventive protection of life. Instead, we attribute the need to comply with our desire to have Yeshivos re-open or remain open. We thus outrageously insinuate that ours is a callous religion r"l exclusively devoted to study, cruelly and irresponsibly impervious to loss of life. Other voices within our communities cite the second wave as a reason for compliance, as though Halachah only reacts to loss of life ex post facto. Our stubborn, ongoing distortion of [Torah] is staggering and frightening. How long will we distort [Torah]? And how long will we continue to be [mechalel sheim Shamayim]? IV The ongoing distortion of Torah and [chilul hasheim] demand from us wide-ranging, incisive introspection. The following thought, briefly presented, constitutes, at best, a partial beginning of this crucial process. The pandemic has not created deficiencies or deficits within our Weltanschauung. It has "only" highlighted pre-existing flaws and exposed their depth. (Thus, for example, we ought to recognize that the imbalance and disproportionality of our approach express themselves in other, non-medical, fundamental forms and contexts.) Accordingly, the end of the pandemic, for which we pray, will not cure these (or other) core religious-spiritual ills. A religious-philosophical system which distorts [Torah] and causes continuous [chilul hasheim] is fundamentally flawed; it can neither guide us in our lives nor provide an educational framework for our children. Fundamental change and correction are required as part of [teshuvah]. The task is most formidable, but not too formidable given the devotion and dedication which characterize our communities. "Let us search our ways, and investigate; and return to Hashem" (Eicha 3:40). Copyright (c) 2020 by TorahWeb.org. All rights reserved. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_righteous.html From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Oct 28 21:33:06 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:33:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months Message-ID: > >>From: Alexander Seinfeld > > >>Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him ?Moshe? in his > lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, > Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) > > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning ?born from?. Hence Ramses was ?born from Ra?. The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It?s unknown whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his birth and being found by bad Paro. It seems unlikely to let that kind of information be public knowledge as it would have been dangerous if it was well known. There are always Dasan and Aviram types around in every society. I just always figured that he was called Robby Musa throughout the time in the desert. >>You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) - Rav Hirsch writes in > one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names > for the week days. > > I didn?t ask about them because those names were not brought into the Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. Whereas the days of the week are used without thinking, for convenience; but are not used in Torah literature. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Oct 30 10:36:57 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:36:57 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition of causing animals pain) apply to insects and rodents? A. Rav Yaakov Emden (Shailas Yavetz 110) writes that it forbidden to kill domesticated animals pointlessly because of the issur of tzar baalei chayim, but is permitted to kill harmful animals, as well as pesty rodents and insects. As noted previously, one of the main sources for tzar baalei chayim is the mitzvah of ?prikah? (helping to unload animals in distress), which relates to animals that work and serve human needs. He writes that even smaller animals such as dogs and cats are also included in the restriction because they have positive functions. As support, Rav Yaakov Emden quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 12a) that Rav Nachman would instruct his daughters to kill lice. Thus, we see that the restriction of tzar baalei chayim does not apply to creatures that bite, sting or otherwise cause harm. He notes that the great kabbalist, the Ari z?l, taught his students not to kill any living creature, including lice. However, that was based on mystical and esoteric concepts, and does not reflect mainstream practice. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 2 05:45:33 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:45:33 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomi Q. Does the issur of tzar baalei chayim (the prohibition against causing pain for animals) apply to non-Jews as well? A. The Aishel Avrohom ? Butchach (OC 305:13) writes that non-Jews are not included in this prohibition, since this is not one of the seven Noahide laws. The Pri Migadim, as well, implies that this prohibition does not apply to non-Jews. However, Sefer Chasidim (12th Century ? siman 666) writes that non-Jews are included in this prohibition, since we find that the angel rebuked Bilaam (who was a non-Jew) for hitting his donkey (Bamidbar 22:32). Additionally, it can be argued that even if there is no formal prohibition for a non-Jew, they are nonetheless morally bound not to mistreat animals. Igeros Moshe (YD 2:130) proves that both Jews and non-Jews are held accountable for negative midos, even though they are not formally included in the 613 mitzvos or the 7 Noahide laws. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 2 14:03:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:03:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] [TM] How to Undo A Minhag Message-ID: <20201102220358.GA16320@aishdas.org> See this recent re-post on Torah Musings by RGS. (Originally posted August 2015.) I got caught up enough to decide to share it here just with his giving a taxonomy of different things that share the name "minhag". We discussed this topic often enough that I am sure someone else would appreciate an organized presentation. Good read! Tir'u baTov! -Micha Torah Musings How to Undo a Minhag Posted by: [R] Gil Student in Halachah Musings, Magazine, Nov 2, [20]20 The term minhag, custom, actually refers to multiple types of practices with different kinds of obligations. By understanding better these differences, we can explore which minhagim are subject to removal and how to accomplish that, if you so wish. Generally speaking, a minhag is a type of neder, an explicit or implicit vow to observe a practice. Some nedarim are subject to annulment through hataras nedarim, a fairly common practice. When can we do hataras nedarim on a minhag we no longer wish to observe? When can we stop observing it even without hataras nedarim? I. Types of Minhagim There are four types of customs, four scopes of customs and three sources of customs. Types: 1. Legal - You mistakenly thought that a practice is forbidden and therefore refrained from it. It isn't an actual law so it is a minhag. 2. Ruling - You had a question and asked your rabbi. While this is a matter of debate, he ruled for you. This ruling is your minhag. Others might follow another view and have a different minhag. 3. Pious Practice - You adopt extra practices and stringencies out of religious fervor, a desire to do extra. 4. Fence - Out of concern that you might sin, you erect a safeguard, an extra stringency to protect you from sinning. This is your personal fence and not a rabbinic enactment. It is your minhag. Scopes: 1. Personal - A minhag can be your own personal practice, self-tailored to match your personality and inclinations. 2. Family - Many families gave unique practices that are handed down for generations. 3. Local - While we do not see this too much today, in past generations there were unique regional and city minhagim. 4. Universal - Some minhagim are observed by the entire Jewish people (more or less). Sources: 1. Self - A minhag can be something that you adopt. You find a specific practice meaningful so you start doing it yourself. 2. Inherited - As is often the case, we are taught minhagim by our parents. 3. Mandated - A third source of minhag is a practice an ancestor adopted specifically that his descendants should follow. This has halakhic significance. With all this in mind, let's address when you can remove a minhag. Two debates are crucial for understanding this topic. Rav Baruch Simon's recent Imrei Barukh: Tokef Ha-Minhag Ba-Halakhah contains three chapters (chs. 3-5) that I found very useful in explaining this subject. II. Permit Us The (Babylonian) Talmud (Pesachim 50b) tells the story of Bnei Beishan who had the minhag of refraining from going to the marketplace on Friday, in order to ensure proper preparation for Shabbos and avoid any potential Shabbos violations. They wished to annul this minhag that they had inherited. Rabbi Yochanan told them that they could not because Proverbs (1:8) says: "Listen, son, to the rebuke of your father and do not abandon the teaching of your mother." The Talmud Yerushalmi (Pesachim 4:1) says that if people observed a minhag because they thought it was the actual law, then if they ask you can permit it for them. If they knew it was not required by the technical law and still observed as an extra measure, then even if they ask, you cannot permit it for them. The Talmudim take minhagim seriously. You cannot simply drop a custom that you don't like. However, there may be ways of removing them. III. Fences The Ramban and many others (Rashba, Ra'avad, Rivash,...) understand the story of Bnei Beishan as teaching that a custom adopted as a fence cannot be removed. However, other minhagim, that are not intended as fences, may follow different rules. A pious practice, as described above, can be annulled through hataras nedarim. The Rosh disagrees, arguing that even a fence may be permitted. According to the Rosh, Bnei Beishan could have asked for their minhag to be annulled with hataras nedarim. Rabbi Yochanan merely told them that, as things stood at the time, they were bound by the minhag. But they could have gotten out of it with hataras nedarim. Significantly, the Shulchan Arukh (Yoreh De'ah 214:1) follows the Rosh, as do all subsequent standard authorities. However, the Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 497, par. 5; followed by Chayei Adam 127:9) writes that, even according to the Rosh, all or most of the people subject to the minhag have to annul it. If an individual receives his own (mistaken) annulment, it doesn't work and he is still bound by the minhag. Rav Shlomo Luria (Responsa Maharshal, no. 6) adds that a custom can only be annulled by someone not bound by it. Therefore, a custom universally practice by Jews cannot be removed. The Shakh (Yoreh De'ah 214:4) follows this ruling, as does the Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 6), who say that "this is clear." Therefore, universal Jewish customs can never be annulled. III. Mistaken Practice All agree that a practice adopted due to a mistaken understanding is not binding. For example, if you thought a specific food is forbidden and therefore refrained from eating it, and later discovered that there is no basis to consider the food forbidden, you may freely eat that food. The minhag is not binding. You do not even need to do hataras nedarim. The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 2) uses this to explain a rabbi's halakhic ruling on a controversial subject. If there is a long-standing debate about a practice and a community follows one specific view, can they switch to another opinion? Quoting the Maharshdam (Responsa, Yoreh De'ah 40), the Pri Chadash explains when and why this is allowed. If a contemporary rabbi proves to his satisfaction that the view the community follows is incorrect, he has rendered their practice a minhag based on a mistake that does not even require hataras nedarim. In other words, if there is a debate between Rashi and Rambam, and the community's former rabbi had ruled like Rashi, the new rabbi has to prove that Rambam was right and Rashi wrong in order to uproot the established ruling. The Pri Chadash adds that few are qualified to weigh in as equals in such debates. He says that in his times, in the seventeenth century, only one or two in a generation are capable. (Yes, he invokes the concept of a gadol ha-dor without using the term.) The Chayei Adam (127:10) follows this Pri Chadash but only mentions one per generation, presumably for stylistic and not substantive reasons. [1] Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. One of the proofs for this ruling is Chullin 111a. Rav Bar Shva went to eat at his teacher Rav Nachman's home. Rav Nachman served liver, which some forbid because of the difficulty in removing blood from the meat. When house servants or other guests informed Rav Nachman that his student was refusing to eat the liver, clearly following the strict view, Rav Nachman instructed them to force the liver down his throat. Rather than show respect for this alternate view, Rav Nachman took a stand for leniency because he had decisively ruled that eating liver is permissible (when prepared properly). IV. Received Customs The rules about annulling customs we have discussed so far have generally referred to the people who initially adopted the customs. If you decide to fast on every Monday to enhance your spirituality (i.e., a pious minhag) or as a way to avoid forbidden foods that are more common in your weekly routine on Monday (i.e., a fence), can you change this practice? Most minhagim we observe today are received from previous generations. The Maharshdam (ibid.) argues that you may not annul a received custom. Only the people who accept a custom may annul it because only they know the full reason the custom was adopted. Subsequent generations, who inherit the practice, must follow it. He proves it from Bnei Beishan, who were not allowed to annul the custom (according to the Ramban et al). The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 8) disagrees. He argues that the heir has the same power as the originator. If the person who accepts a custom can annul it, so may his descendants. In this, he follows the Rosh (as above) that Bnei Beishan could have annulled their custom but their question was whether they must follow it absent annulment. The Pri To'ar (39:32) takes a middle position. When someone accepts a practice with the intent that his descendants must follow in his footsteps, that custom is binding on then. Otherwise, absent that explicit intent, the custom is a personal stringency that his children need not follow. V. Local and Family Customs Who or what is Beishan? The Pri Chadash (ibid., par. 7) explains that Beishan is a contraction of Beis She'an (or Beit She'an or Beth She'an), a city in Israel that still exists. The people of that city, the members of Beis She'an, approached Rabbi Yochanan about discarding a local custom. The Pri To'ar (ibid.) disagrees and assumes that Beishan was a family name. Members of that family asked Rabbi Yochanan about their family custom. According to the Pri Chadash a local custom is binding. As long as you associate with that place, you must follow its customs. The Mishnah (Pesachim 50a) states that someone who comes from a place with a specific custom must observe it even if he is spending time elsewhere. The Gemara (ad loc., 51a) adds that if you move to a place, you become a member of that city and adopt its customs. Therefore, if you live in a city with a custom you wish to discard, you can move to a city with a contrary custom. However, this only works if the new place has a custom that contradicts the custom of the old place; the new custom overrides the old one. If you move to a city that has no standard custom, in which many people with different customs coexist within one community, then there is no new custom to override the old custom. You must continue practicing your old custom. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggeros Moshe, Even Ha-Ezer 1:59) writes that there is no such thing as a local custom in America. Everyone who moves to America must keep their prior customs. Similarly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (quoted in R. Yerachmiel Fried, Yom Tov Sheini Ke-Hilkhaso 19:5) rules similarly that Jerusalem has no single custom and no one who moves there may change his customs, except for a few unique customs accepted by all the communities there. However, according to the Pri To'ar, there is also a concept of a family custom. Even if you move to a place with an established custom, you still have to follow your family customs. Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv rules this way. [52] Rav Hershel Schachter ("Hashbei'a Hishbi'a" in Beis Yitzchak 39, 2007) explains that some customs are family-based and some locale-based, although they are not always easy to differentiate. You must follow a family custom even if you move to a place that has a different custom. He adds that if you change families, you change family customs. One example is a woman who marries and, generally speaking, adopts the customs of her husband's family. However, sometimes a man with little knowledge of his lineage (e.g. a ba'al teshuvah) marries a woman of prominent lineage and adopts her family's customs. VI. Undoing a Custom In summary, you can discard a custom if: 1. It falls into the category of a mistaken custom 2. It is based on a prior halakhic ruling and one of the unique Torah scholars of the generation ruled against this practice 3. All (or most) of the people subject to the custom formally annul it (which is not possible with a universal custom) 4. You move to a place with a contrary custom, except for family customs 5. You change families -- 1. Note that the Chayei Adam includes this ruling in his chapter on kitniyos, which he did not consider a mistaken custom but a fence. As we discussed elsewhere , even Rav Ya'akov Emden, the most authoritative view against kitniyos, believed it is a binding custom. 2. As quoted in R. Moshe Fried, Responsa Va-Yishma Moshe, pp. 267-268; Sefer He'aros Al Masekhes Pesachim, p. 293, both cited by R. Baruch Simon, ibid., p. 71 From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 3 14:38:10 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 22:38:10 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Message-ID: Catholic Judges in Capital Cases Amy Coney Barrett, Notre Dame Law School John H. Garvey Whole thing is here https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/527/ I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to discuss parallels with our thought: CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty. This means that they can neither themselves sentence criminals to death nor enforce jury recommendations of death. Whether they may affirm lower court orders of either kind is a question we have the most difficulty in resolving. - - - - - - - - - - In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action. In judging the morality of the cooperator's action, the most important distinction the Church draws is between what it calls formal and material cooperation. Here is a simile to help lawyers think about the distinction. In first amendment law there are two "tracks" for judging government actions that sin against the freedom of speech. Track one is for cases where the government acts with a bad intention-where it restricts speech because it does not like what is being said. (Imagine a law forbidding people to make jokes about the Vice President.) This kind of action is almost always unconstitutional. Track two is for cases where the government restricts speech unintentionally, in the course of doing something else. (Imagine a law against littering applied to a politician distributing handbills.) This kind of action is sometimes unconstitutional and sometimes not. The courts will balance the law's good effects against its impact on speech. - - - - - - - - - - Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some extent desirable. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Tue Nov 3 17:25:43 2020 From: seinfeld at daasbooks.com (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 20:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let?s say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 03:48:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 11:48:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that his child will never need to work? In other words, is the reason for the mitzvah so that the child may live, or is the reason so that the child (who is not a lamdan, let's say for the sake of discussion) will have something meaningful to do? ============================================ 1. kiddushin 239 a/b seems to imply not IF you could be sure the$ would last for life (so never would have to steal) - which imho can't guarantee. And all the exceptions discussed seem to be for full time learnin 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider this imho Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 3 13:32:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:32:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] [TorahWeb] A Great Nation by Rabbi Mordechai Willig Message-ID: >From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2020/parsha/rwil_lechlecha.html [The TorahWeb Devar Torah for Lekh-Likha 5781, "A Great Nation" by R Mordechai Willig. -mb] > The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the Orthodox Jewish community > disproportionately. All of the blessings of "I will make you a great > nation" have been affected. The sheer number of fatalities, r"l, has > quantitatively reduced our great nation. Of course, each loss is a > terrible tragedy for the deceased and the close family and friends. But > the cumulative losses in the Orthodox community have been devastating. > Our reputation as a wise and understanding nation has been > tarnished. Despite staggering numbers of mortality and morbidity, > and notwithstanding repeated warnings and predictions that have come > true, appropriate precautions are often ignored. Nearly all physicians, > including numerous Orthodox doctors, agree that masks and social distance > reduce risk of transmission. In many if not most circumstances, lack > of precaution adds danger. It is not only unscientific, it is against > the halachic requirement to avoid danger whenever possible. The dozens > of recent Covid-19 funerals across the spectrum of Orthodoxy, in the US > and Eretz Yisrael, should lead to universal compliance. The failure to > wear masks and to distance is a perplexing case of cognitive dissonance, > unbefitting a wise and understanding nation. See the above URL for the rest of the article. Those in the Orthodox community who do not follow the guidelines of the authorities have indeed led to a diminution of how the world views observant Jews. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 4 06:46:05 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:46:05 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Does one recite the beracha of Shehechiyanu when purchasing a fur coat or a hat? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 223:3) writes that the beracha of Shehechiyanu is recited when one purchases an expensive article of clothing. Does this Halacha also apply to one who purchased an expensive fur coat or hat? Perhaps it is inappropriate to recite Shehechiyanu ?that he has kept us alive?, since the making of the coat involved the killing of animals. Indeed, the Rema (OC 223:6) writes that although it is customary to wish one who buys a new suit ?tivleh v?tischadeish? (you should wear it out and replace it), this blessing should not be said to one who purchased leather shoes or clothing made from hides, since this would require slaughtering more animals, and the verse in Tehilim (145:9) states ?V?rachamav al kol ma?asav? (His kindness is on all his creations). The Rema concludes that although this line of reasoning is very weak and does not appear to be correct, still many are careful about this. The Rema does not address the berachah of shehechiyanu, and this would seem to indicate that it is recited. Indeed, the Pri Migadim (Mishbitzos Zahav OC 22:1) states that one recites Shehechiyanu on a fur coat. He explains that Shehechiyanu is recited, since at the time when one purchases the coat, the animals were already killed, but it is inappropriate to bless someone with ?tivleh v?tischadeish?, since that is a wish for the future killing of animals. There is a dissenting opinion. Sefer Mor V?ahalos (Ohel Brachos siman 24) disagrees with the Pri Migadim and writes that shehechiyanu should not be recited on a fur coat, just as one does not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish?. However, later poskim such as the Sdei Chemed (5:Berachos 28:6) side with the Pri Migadim. Others point out that even the Rema wrote that the reasons to not say ?tivleh v?tischadeish? do not appear to be correct. Certainly, one should not rely on logic when there is a requirement to say a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 07:04:43 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:04:43 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 10:38:10PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > I found the statements below particularly interesting and would love to > discuss parallels with our thought: The then-future Justice Barrette wrote: >> CATHOLIC JUDGES IN CAPITAL CASES >> To anticipate our conclusion just briefly, we believe that Catholic >> judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are >> morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.... OTOH, the 7 mitzvos Benei Noach allow the use of capital punishment. On the meta-issue, Xianity has "render unto Caesar", which may be the cultural basis for accepting a separation of church and state. Whereas halakhah very much avoids drawing a line between religion and state. In fact, because the 7 mitzvos include batei dinim, a Torah observant judge may at times be called on to be machmir in this halakhah at the expense of another. So to me the question would be halachic parameted; exactly when does a SCOTUS's *halachic* obligation to uphold the Constitution, or another judge's or juror, or attourny's duty to uphold the law override what? Given that the law often involves both capital punishment and war, I am not even sure piquach nefesh can be trivially taken off the table in other contexts either. >> In Catholic moral theology, there is an extensive literature on >> this subject, usually collected under the heading of cooperation >> with evil. Stated abstractly, these are cases where one person ("the >> cooperator") gives physical or moral assistance to another person ("the >> wrongdoer") who is doing some immoral action... Like mesayeia and lifnei iver? RJR again: > Implicit in the Chief Justice's observation are two reasons why we > should not automatically disqualify judges for holding such views or > convictions. One is that everyone has them. If we applied this criterion > faithfully we would disqualify the entire judiciary. The rule of necessity > that allows judges to sit on cases about judicial compensation applies > here too: better a flawed judge than no judge at all. The second is > that the possession of convictions is not only inevitable, it is to some > extent desirable. The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into their politics. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Wed Nov 4 07:17:08 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:17:08 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> References: , <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > > The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes > impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms > of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by > which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no > legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into > their politics. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they?ve developed from whatever source. I?ve listened to a ton of podcasts trying to understand what that source is. As best as I can understand that it?s from the gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I?m trying to understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better if they think about it cognitively ,not emotionally. 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 Wed Nov 4 07:06:07 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 10:06:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104150607.GD32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 11:48:40AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > 2.psulei eidut sanhedrin 24b include dice players - r sheishet says > because not involved in yishuvo shel olam. A good father will consider > this imho Yishuvo shel olam includes teaching Torah, doing charity work, and lots of things a person can do other than a money making profession. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 09:21:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:21:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Catholic Judges in Capital Cases In-Reply-To: References: <20201104150443.GC32741@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201104172102.GF32741@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 03:17:08PM +0000, Rich, Joel wrote: >> The whole idea of a separation of religion and state becomes >> impossible. Laws should be moral. Religion (including the various forms >> of atheism as religions for this purpose) provides the framework by >> which an individual decides what is moral. No judge, for that matter no >> legislator or voter, could entirely avoid bringing their religion into >> their politics. > And if not religion then whatever ethics/morals they've developed from > whatever source. ... As best as I can understand that it's from the > gut with an evolution with similarly believing people. I'm trying to > understand why secularists think that their approaches are any better > if they think about it cognitively,not emotionally. This fits perfectly between the parentheses in my previous post -- "(including the various forms of atheism as religions for this purpose)". By saying that our moral code is supposed to be whatever strategy our genes have successfully copies themselves with, one is also taking a religious position. One is enshrining a *lack* of higher calling. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 12:34:34 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor door that almost broke. What?s up with that? 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just met, to the same fate. That?s not a description of an evil man. Even the worst of the worst rashayim wouldn?t sacrifice their children to that. This isn?t a portrait of a bad person, even the most evil of evil. This is a one dimensional cartoon character that is not even reminiscent of a low-life evil human. A human, that isn?t mentally damaged, wouldn?t do this. Nor is this chesed gone bad. Even if he knew, by this time, that they were malachim, they could have taken care of themselves. Young virgin girls couldn?t. Someone (a Rav) once tried to tell me that this was the halachically preferable decision because giving men over to be raped is a much worse to?eivah than a rape of a penuya. Those Lot was a tzadik. If I am ever diagnosed with a brain tumor, it will be because that response is in my head. Can anyone help me to understand this? Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:20:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:20:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. Actually, Seforno gives a realistic interpretation... Lot didn't realize what kind of people his sons-in-law were. He thought they merited being saved with him; instead they laugh when he suggests fleeing, and thus end up punished along with the rest of Sodom. At this point in the story, Lot still thought they shared his ideals, just needing some prodding before being willing to take on a whole town. But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They didn't. 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 micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 4 14:41:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 17:41:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Names of the Months In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201104224132.GC2521@aishdas.org> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:33:06PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > From: Alexander Seinfeld >> Not only did Moshe have many names, few people called him "Moshe" in his >> lifetime. (His father called him Avigdor, his mother called him Tovia, >> Bnai Yisroel called him Sofer etc.) (Then there's Yekusiel...) > I have no reason to think that Moshe was called anything other than Musa. > It was an Egyptian word (ie. The consonants m-s) meaning 'born from'. Hence > Ramses was 'born from Ra'. I think "Moshe" was more like the number of Koreans in the US named "Kim"; it's popular in their community because the name exists in both cultures. It's not that the pasuq is saying "ki min hamayim meshisihu" was her motive to the exclusion of calling him her son. Rather, she used the name because it had meaning to her in both languages simultaneously; > The people knew him by that name as part of the royal family. It's unknown > whether Bnei Yisrael knew that he was one of them and the story behind his > birth and being found by bad Paro.... Except that even as a newborn, he "looked Jewish" to Bas-Par'oh. Moshe Rabbeinu had textbook Israelitish features and/or coloring, not Egyptian ones. So it is likely everyone knew he was one of us the same way. >> You con?t ask about days of the week (in English) -- Rav Hirsch writes in >> one of his essays how much it bothers him that people use idolatrous names >> for the week days. > I didn't ask about them because those names were not brought into the > Torah world by a consensus of chachamim as the months were. Nisan, Iyar, > Sivan are now the official Jewish names and are used in Halachik discourse. But only Tammuz is idolatrous. As as is the meaning of the names Mordechai and Esther. And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a little more slack.) Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 16:12:36 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 18:12:36 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to daughters, that aren?t mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go out to speak to them. They were not there when Lot went out to offer his unmarried daughters. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 09:59:16 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:59:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105175916.GA17754@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 06:12:36PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: > > But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. They > > didn't > The girls he offered were virgins... You are correct, I misrepresented the Seforno. He assumes the daughters in question were engaged. And it's the fiances he was trying to rope in. Here's the Seforno (19:8 d"h "otzi'ah nah eshein aleikhem"), I think it's short enough for a transliteration to be readable: Chashav sheyaqumu loqechei venosav "veqam she'on" beineihem. ("Veqam shaon" appears to be lifted from Hoasheia 10:14, and is usally translated there as something related to the sounds or tumult of war.) The Seforno doesn't explain where he gets this from. Maybe making a point about "asher lo yad'u ish" implies that they are not full penuyos, but...? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From akivagmiller at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 18:32:13 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 21:32:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade Message-ID: . R' Alexander Seinfeld asked: > Does this mitzvah apply to a father who has enough wealth that > his child will never need to work? I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. For example: - How can one be sure that the money will last? - How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? - What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? I developed many thoughts on this topic years ago, but Warren Buffet expressed it much better than I could. To him the perfect amount to leave children is > enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, > but not so much that they could do nothing. https://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/09/29/68098/index.htm Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Thu Nov 5 11:03:30 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 21:03:30 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: <20201104222011.GB2521@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <5FA44C82.5050805@biu.ac.il> Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > On Wednesday, November 4, 2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> But he took it for granted they would fight to defend their wives. >> They didn't > The girls he offered were virgins. The sons-in-laws were married to > daughters, that aren't mentioned, lived elsewhere and Lot had to go > out to speak to them.... Rashi says that the daughters he offered had kiddushin already but were virgins before nissuin. From afolger at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 11:35:26 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 20:35:26 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot Message-ID: RCBKaufman wrote: > 1) the door of Lot?s house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. The angels then suddenly open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, pull Lot back and close the door again. Once the door would break, everyone would be condemned to violent death. And then the angels perform teh miracle of hitting the people outside with "sanverim". > 2) Lot offers his daughters to be gang raped and killed by an unimaginable > number of brutal animals rather than hand over his guests, whom he just > met, to the same fate. I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not. Lot considers justice and sees that he owes the strangers protection because they sought protection under his roof (or rather because Lot insisted that they do). His daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, that being a parents obligates you to your children (and them to you). The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not give rise to any special moral claims. Obviously, we reject this argument (kibud av va'em being a case in point), but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Thu Nov 5 06:18:22 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:18:22 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] Pagan Names In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Nov 5, 2020 11:10:58 am Message-ID: <16046075020.6DD56c.9125@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > And why doesn't R Hirsch discuss contemporary month names? Are > Janus, Mars, Maia, or Juno less pagan than Woden, Thor, Tiw or Frig? > (Saturday is named for Saturn via the planet, so I'll cut that one a > little more slack.) > > Off-the-cuff, I am thinking it's the fact that he is in Germany that > gave the names of Teutonic gods a little more grouding in the > surrounding culture, and thus the name's origins less forgotten. > Pedantic correction: the pagan origin of the English word "Wednesday" does not belong in this list. The German-speaking people among whom Hirsch lived did not call Wednesday "Wednesday". In the German language that day has something of a numeric name, like the names we Hebrews use for the days of the week (every speaker of Yiddish knows this). (On the other hand, the popular etymology attributing "Dienstag" to "Dienst" -- thus making the name of the day something like the French "vendredi" -- is incorrect. If anything, the etymology goes in the other direction.) This is, as I said, a pedantic correction. But we are Jews, and we love pedantic corrections. 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 micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 5 12:34:20 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 15:34:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 08:08:57PM -0500, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> The most exact translation of "yam" is "seabed", not "sea". As in >> "mayim bayamim". > Do you have a source to translate it like that? In English we say "...all > of the water in the sea." and still sea doesn't mean seabed. I thought that this is why the term for a bottom grindstone is also "yam". Also, the "miqveih mayim" of day 2 was "miqveh" in the pi'el (and semichut, thus the tzeirei). There were two things named in Bereishis 1:10, "E-lokim called the dry land 'eretz', and the gatherers of the water, He called 'yamim'." See also the Tur (ad loc, "ulemiqveih hamayim qara yamim"): Explanation, "yam" for water. Becasue the qara of the mayim is called yam, as it says "kamayim layam mechasim". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger When memories exceed dreams, http://www.aishdas.org/asp The end is near. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Moshe Sherer - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Nov 5 12:20:45 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 15:20:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 02:10 PM 11/5/2020,R. Akiva Miller wrote: >I don't know what reasons Chazal gave to this principle, but I can see many >practical reasons why such a father should make sure that his kids have >some sort of job so that they don't need to rely on their inheritance. First of all, I think that in the time of Chazal the requirement to teach a child a trade applied to boys, not girls. So I think the subject should read "Teaching you son a trade." >For >example: > >- How can one be sure that the money will last? >- How can he be sure that the child won't just waste the money? >- What kind of role model will the grandchildren have? After we learned the sugya about this in one of R. Avigdor Miller's shiurim I asked him privately, "Why don't fathers do this today? They let their sons learn in yeshiva and do not make sure they get skills to earn a living." He relied, "Look at my shul. they are doctors, lawyers, accountants, and yet their sons have no training to earn a living. My son Shmuel has a wealthy father-in-law, so there will be enough money for his children, but what will happen to Shmuel's grandchildren?" For the record, he never said anything like this publicly. Today there are programs that give men have been learning in Kollel job skills when they want to (have to) leave Kollel. The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 17:19:55 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 19:19:55 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> References: <20201020213317.GB2178@aishdas.org> <20201105203420.GD17754@aishdas.org> Message-ID: That is very interesting. I hadn?t understood it this way, but to lend support your idea, the Yam Shel Shlomo was the name of a kli that held water. Also, b?derech CHei?N, the word ?yam? in TaNaCH and Chazal, always alludes to Malchus, which has no essence of its own, but is rather a kli that is the sum of all that it contains. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 20:24:03 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 22:24:03 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? (?Gash hal?ah?). The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, himself. >>open the door, obviously fighting off anyone who's right there, Then the Malachim stick their hands outside the door; only their hands (vayishlachu... their hands...). Again, there is no implication of them fighting with anyone. They grabbed Lot and pulled him inside. But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. The first few psukim in the parsha mention the words ?Avraham saw? twice, and a lot of Torah is learned, and taught, based on the repetition of these two words. This door is mentioned 3 times, so I think it?s clearly telling us something special. I did find what I was looking for in the name of the Arizal; unfortunately it?s difficult to break it down into a simple idea. >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether one > is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His > daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim > against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, > but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was either giving over the men, or not. A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those who are closest come first. This is human nature and decency. Regardless of how Xian Enlightenment philosophers discuss the issue. I am not, in the slightest bit, obligated to take their opinions into consideration when it comes to any moral decision, nor to refer to their ideas as enlightened when compared to the Torah and basic human instinctual decency. Every parent knows what not to do when given the option to hand his daughters to be raped and killed. > > >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not > give rise to any special moral claims. > > It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in > promiscuous cultures. > > >>, but the argument should suffice not to make into a rasha someone who > calmly considers competing moral arguments, seeking to do the right thing. > The Torah?s teachings are certainly not competing with the moral arguments outside of Torah. But, I don?t even think that the Torah weighs in on this issue explicitly. I have no qualms about calling Lot?s actions here cartoonishly over the top evil; not in this specific case. Seriously, knowingly offering your daughters to a mob of barbarians to raped and killed is is not a moral dilemma in any situation. I hate having to be so black and white on a moral issue in any situation that I?ve ever encountered. But this one is so absurd in its extreme, that it would be far more absurd to even ponder the morality of offering girls to be raped and brutalized, especially when Lot himself raised the issue. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:39:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:39:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of giluy arayos. And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; (2) Does regard it as not nearly as big a deal for a woman, let alone a single woman, as it does for a man. "Darkan bekach". It's not what she prefers, but if it happens it happens. Cf the story of the 400 girls and boys who committed suicide rather than submit to a lifetime of this; the girls took the initiative, and then the boys reasoned that it was a *kal vachomer* that they must follow their example. So from the point of view of a reader whose values are derived entirely from the Torah, Lot's decision doesn't seem to need much explanation, which is why Rashi doesn't offer any. Also, I see nothing in the pasuk to indicate that a "mob of thousands" was "pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they were about to break down the door", "like Europeans at a football/soccer game, by sheer force of the crowd". All the pasuk says is that "they approached to break down the door". The mob was probably no more than a few dozen (how big was Sedom?); not enough to exert that sort of physical force. Rather, having been denied what they were demanding they were threatening to break down the door and take it. Lot, standing in front of the door, was now in danger, so the angels pulled him in and shut it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From afolger at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 07:10:38 2020 From: afolger at aishdas.org (Arie Folger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 16:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:24 AM R Brent Kaufman wrote: > >>The Torah is pretty explicit. The door is closed, Lot is outside, and > they begin abusing him, perhaps violently so. > > I disagree. They aren?t abusing him. Their concerned with what?s inside > the house. They aren?t concerned with Lot and tell him to ?Step aside? > (?Gash hal?ah?). > I context, that's a threat. > > The crowd is pushing its way forward, like Europeans at a football/soccer > game, by shear force of the crowd. Nothing here implies abuse towards Lot, > himself. > Have you ever faced hooligans at a football game? They can be pretty scary; the Sodomites were similar but worse. > > But this doesn?t address my question. I often express myself poorly. I > apologize. I meant that this is not just your average door. It is mentioned > 3 times. The narrative could have been told without drawing any attention > to the logistics of goin to speak to, and calm, the mob. > I want to suggest that the focus on the door is to underline how precarious the situation was. Once the door would be broken, they would commit a massacre. That's what mobs often do. But since you report seeing a teaching from the Ari which satisfies you, please share it with us. > > >> famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the question of whether >> one is morally obligated to family more than to strangers, .......His >> daughters, as citizens of Sedom, would not have that additional claim >> against Lot, unless one posits, as you do and to which Torah would agree, >> but which isn't the only or most obvious enlightened position, >> > > However, no; just no. There was no apparent moral dilemma before Lot > brought up the idea of substituting his daughters. Before that it was > either giving over the men, or not. > Not giving them up and they all probably die after being gang raped. > > A parent protects his family, young women, girls, his wife. This isn?t a > moral dilemma. The Torah tells us to prioritize how we give tzedaka; those > who are closest come first. > Very nice, so you agree that the Torah disagrees with those Enlightenment thinkers. But the debate exists and those not impacted sufficiently by Torah may think it virtuous to treat their guest better than family even when that means sacrificing one for the other. The thinker I was trying to quote is Montesquieu. "A truly virtuous man would come to the aid of the most distant stranger as quickly as to his own friend. If men were perfectly virtuous, they wouldn't have friends." So Lot, who isn't Avraham, may have felt like Montesquieu. >> >>The opposite claim is that parenthood is accidental and thus does not >> give rise to any special moral claims. >> >> It is only accidental for people who are promiscuous or that live in >> promiscuous cultures. >> > No, accidental means that it happens without giving rise to moral obligations (in the twisted thinking of people who think like Montesquieu). Of course, kibud av va'em disapproves, but Lot wasn't keeping kol hatorah kullah. But there are also other possible solutions to your dilemma. Lot could have been using sarcasm and implying "I am as likely to set you losoe on them as I am to give you my daughters. Here they are, do you think I will let you?" This is Rav Menachem Leibtag's interpretation. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en, Yours sincerely, Arie Folger, Visit my blog at http://rabbifolger.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From renapoppers at outlook.com Thu Nov 5 18:11:51 2020 From: renapoppers at outlook.com (Rena Poppers) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 02:11:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 14:34:34 -0600 From: Brent Kaufman > Regarding the narrative of Lot, I have 2 questions: > 1) the door of Lot's house is mentioned 3 (THREExxx) times. That in itself > is unusual, but the second time, when Lot is between the mob of thousands > and the door, the mob is pushing soo hard that the Torah tells us that they > were about to break down the door. Anyone have an obvious question? > Before they even get to the door, they would have had to completely crush > Lot to death, but the Torah is more concerned to tell us about the poor > door that almost broke. What?s up with that? ... To respond to the first question... Last year a friend and I learned this parsha about Lot and we had the same question about the door being mentioned so much, but I don't think we found an answer. We did learn that regarding the apparent pushing very hard against Lot - according to Malbim, when pasuk 9 says that they pressed against Lot, it means that they were verbally "pressing" against Lot, whom they now considered as only an ordinary person (an ish) and not worthy of being a judge (as he had been appointed). This explains the language of "va'yifztiru b'ish b'Lot". Also, Malbim's opinion is that the mob pushed Lot aside from where he stood next to the door (rather than crushing him). Further support for the understanding of "va'yifztiru" as being pressuring with words is the word "va'yiftzar" in pasuk 3, when Lot pressures the malachim to stay as his guests - clearly a verbal pressuring. Also, in Vayishlach, when Yaakov pressures Eisav to take his gifts (Genesis 33:11), "va'yiftzar" is used. (At the time, I think we looked this word up in the concordance but I didn't write down if this word occurs in any other places.) From zev at sero.name Fri Nov 6 06:45:11 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 09:45:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <620dc5bf-addf-f4e3-d432-69e31ab1d312@sero.name> The "Tehom" is a body of water that is assumed to lie deep under the earth. Before the second day it covered the surface. David drilled down to it and the flow of water was so strong that it caused a flood. Also hot springs are assumed to come from it. (So was the water David dealt with hot? It's not stated.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 10:58:57 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:58:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 08:35:26PM +0100, Arie Folger via Avodah wrote: > I forgot who it was, but famous enlightenment thinkers struggled with the > question of whether one is morally obligated to family more than to > strangers, and the argument was made that ideally justice and virtue should > be so blind that it doesn't matter if one is close or not... As I'll quote below, this is famously a centerpiece of R Shimon's in the haqdamah to Shaarei Yosher. So, I've looked at the topic while researching for Widen Your Tent. I ended up deciding not to include any comparison to other traditions. The Stoics had a view called oikeiosis, from the word oikos, home or household. Here is how Hierocles describes it (1st cent BCE, quoted in Stobaeus 4.671-673): Each one of us is as it were entirely encompassed by many circles, some smaller, others larger, the latter enclosing the former on the basis of their different and unequal dispositions relative to each other. The first and closest circle is the one which a person has drawn as though around a center, his own mind. This circle encloses the body and anything taken for the sake of the body. For it is virtually the smallest circle, and almost touches the center itself. Next, the second one further removed from the center but enclosing the first circle; this contains parents, siblings, wife, and children. The third one has in it uncles and aunts, grandparents, nephews, nieces, and cousins. The next circle includes the other relatives, and this is followed by the circle of local residents, then the circle of fellow tribesmen, next that of fellow citizens, and then in the same way the circle of people from neighboring towns, and then the circle of fellow-countrymen. The outermost and largest circle, which encompasses all the rest, is that of the whole human race. Once these have all been surveyed, it is the task of a well-tempered man, in his proper treatment of each group, to draw the circles together somehow towards the center, and to keep zealously transferring those from the enclosing circles into the enclosed ones. It is incumbent on us to respect people from the third circle as if they were those from the second, and again to respect our other relatives as if they were those from the third circle. ... Over in China, Meng Tzi (hamechunah "Mencius" in Latin): That which people are capable of without learning is their genuine capability. That which they know without pondering is their genuine knowledge. Among babes in arms there are none that do not know to love their parents. When they grow older, there are none that do not know to revere their elder brothers. Treating one's parents as parents is benevolence. Revering one's elders is righteousness. There is nothing else to do but extend these to the world. I stumbled into the latter when seeing an article in "aeon" by Eric Schwitzgebel titled "How Mengzi came up with something better than the Golden Rule" Two points he made that spoke to me: Maybe we can model Golden Rule/others' shoes thinking like this: 1. If I were in the situation of person x, I would want to be treated according to principle p. 2. Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have others do unto you. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And maybe we can model Mengzian extension like this: 1. I care about person y and want to treat that person according to principle p. 2. Person x, though perhaps more distant, is relevantly similar. 3. Thus, I will treat person x according to principle p. And: ... Mengzian extension is more psychologically plausible as a model of moral development. People do, naturally, have concern and compassion for others around them. Explicit exhortations aren't needed to produce this natural concern and compassion, and these natural reactions are likely to be the main seed from which mature moral cognition grows. Our moral reactions to vivid, nearby cases become the bases for more general principles and policies. If you need to reason or analogise your way into concern even for close family members, you're already in deep moral trouble. Now, on to R Shimon: The entire "ani" of a coarse and lowly person is restricted only to his substance and body. Above him is someone who feels that his "ani" is a synthesis of body and soul. And above him is someone who can include in his "ani" all of his household and family. Someone who walks according to the way of the Torah, his "ani" includes the whole Jewish People, since in truth every Jewish person is only like a limb of the body of the nation of Israel. In this [progression] there are more levels for a fully developed person, who can ingrain in his soul the feeling that the entire world is his 'ani,' and he himself is only one small limb of all of Creation. Then, his self-love helps him love the entire Jewish People and all of Creation. In my opinion, this idea is hinted at in Hillel's words, as he used to say, "Im ein ani li, mi li? Ukeshe'ani le'atzmi, mah ani?" It is fitting for each person to strive to be concerned for himself. (Earlier Rav Shimon discussed Rabbi Aqiva, two people in the desert and one owns enough water to just save one, `and chayekha qodmin.) But with this, he must also strive to understand that "Ukeshe'ani le'avemi, mah ani?" -- that if he constricts his "ani" to a narrow domain, limited to what the eye can see [is him], then his "ani" -- what is it? Vanity and ignorable. If his feelings are broader and include [all of] Creation, that he is a great person and also like a small limb in this great body, then he is lofty and of great worth. In a great machine, even the smallest screw is important if it even serves the smallest role in the machine. For the whole is made of parts, and no more than the sum of its parts. To Rav Shimon, this is how we resolve the centrality of chessed in avodas Hashem with the fact that Hashem created within us a healthy dose of self-interest. Chessed, ahavas Yisrael and ahavas haberios don't come from selflessness, but by reflecting on self interest. To which I would add (but didn't, because it only occured to me after Widen was published) that this approach to chessed makes empathy and compassion easier. After all, if my approach to chessed is through bitul, and bowing out of their way, the other's pain is their pain, and I am committing myself to help them as an outsider who (at least in this situation) has lower priority. The relevant emotions would be mercy or pity. But, if I act because I am aware of and thinking about our interconnectedness, then I am sharing in their pain, and I am acting from compassion and empathy. And, thinking about the definition of "rechem", I would presume rachamim is more like "compassion" or "empathy" than "mercy". Okay, I'm going to stop here. There is much more I could say. In fact, one might think I could write a book about it... :-)BBii! -Micha (PS / ad: A discount on Widen Your Tent is available to Avodah members.) -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 6 11:20:50 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 14:20:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> References: <0fcfd461-64c2-0028-a9ae-65961f55c874@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201106192050.GF17970@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 09:39:40AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos. "... other than that, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?" > And whatever modern attitudes are, the Torah > (1) Does not regard rape as a crime in itself -- it regards it merely as a > combination of giluy arayos and an ordinary assault to be dealt with just > like any other, assessing the five categories of damages as appropriate; And ordinary assault is still assault. It's harm. You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point, :-)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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:31:56 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:31:56 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Delet Hakodesh and Lot In-Reply-To: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> References: <20201106185857.GD17970@aishdas.org> Message-ID: This doesn?t seem to address the issue with Lot. Granted that we should all try to brring the outer rings of our Self circle into where the inner rings are; however, that means to bring the inner rings, if not even closer to us, then to keep them where they are. In Lot?s case though, he is exchanging the inner and outer rings, and while bringing the outer rings (strangers) to take the place of the inner rings (family) , and sending the inner rings past where the outer rings where. cbk -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sat Nov 7 18:06:11 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2020 21:06:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place Message-ID: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Started shenayim miqra for Chayei Sarah. I think there is something going on here that I never heard pointed out. Avraham asks to be a gravesite as an achuzas qaver. Benei Cheis often him a grave saying, You are a nasi Elokim amongst us, "is mimenu es qivro lo yikhleh mimekha". Seforno points out that they offer Avraham to bury quickly, as is appropriate, and not spend time on buying real estate. But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want /your/ deceased in /his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family to have Sarah buried among them. But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be Avraham's roots in their community. Decades ago I hear R Menachem Zupnick suggest that that Avraham acquires the field and me'arah twice -- once from Efron, and a second time in 18-20, "... leAvraham la'achuzas qaver Mei'eis Benei Cheis. From Efron he acquires the field as property, but then he acquires soveignty from the Hittite nation. Note the word "achuzah" in that quoted snippet from 23:20. But now looking at the earlier pesuqim, it seems there is a whole tension here... Avraham opens by defining himself as a geir vetoshav, Benei Cheis suggest making him one of them, no element of geirus. He pushes back, establishing himself a toshav, but of an independent nation. Gut Voch! -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 zev at sero.name Sun Nov 8 02:06:30 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2020 05:06:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Whose Burial Place In-Reply-To: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> References: <20201108020611.GA4717@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <85050f0a-e377-99fc-8437-03ddc8dd819e@sero.name> On 11/7/20 9:06 PM, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > But I was thinking... Couldn't they be trying to assimilate Avraham > into their nation? Sure, you're a great man... Any of us would want > /your/ deceased in/his/ grave. It would be an honor for the family > to have Sarah buried among them. > > But the plot would stay a Hittite burial ground, and Sarah would be > Avraham's roots in their community. See Malbim, who says the issue here was that their laws did not allow foreigners to buy property. So they were willing to let him bury Sara on *their* property, but he could not have an "achuzas kever" of his own, that would belong to him and his family. He insisted that they change their laws, and eventually won, but it took some time. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 06:27:22 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 14:27:22 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: >From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night. Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during the daytime. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 9 09:54:55 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:54:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Hirsch's Concept ot Mensch-Yiaroel Message-ID: The following is from the Editors' Preface to Volume VIII of the Collected Writings of RSRH. The universal applicability of Torah to Jewish life-throughout the ages and under any circumstance-is an axiom of our tradition. Torah encompasses every aspect of life, and the entirety of life is under its domain. All of man's knowledge, endeavors and accomplishments can be utilized for Torah and are thereby given eternal value: The timeless supremacy of Torah in the world and the resultant intrinsic worth of all of Creation for Torah defines what Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch called "Torah im Derech Eretz." All of mankind-as God's creations-are to fulfill the basic Divine laws of humanity, the universal laws of justice, decency and morality commonly know as the "Seven Laws of Noach." The Jew must also fulfill these basic laws, but in their fulfillment alone he has failed his calling as a Jew: Only by fulfilling the Torah, in addition to the universal laws of humanity, can the Jew achieve the purpose of his existence. He is not at stark variance with the rest of mankind; he has additional obligations: He becomes the ideal human being (Mensch) by faithfully abiding by the Torah (Yisroe[): Throughout his writings, but in particular in the Horeb, Rav Hirsch characterized this ideal as ?Mensch-YisroeL" The "Mensch-Yisroel" is the Torah-true Jew who demonstrates what Torah means to the Jew, the ultimate value of its knowledge, its all-encompassing nature, its applicability to all times, its promotion of the highest possible moral standards and its compatibility with life in this world. In essence "Mensch-Yisroel" is synonymous with "Torah im Derech Eretz." These are the principles which are the very roots of the teachings of Rav Hirsch, and it is with them that he boldly defended Torah Judaism .against the onslaught of Reform and the challenge of change. And these are the very principles which, more than a century after his passing and after the cataclysmic upheavals in modem Jewish life, have enabled Torah life to flourish within modern civilization in an invigorated form far beyond the immediate confines of the original students and followers Rav Hirsch. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Nov 9 08:05:09 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 11:05:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] To Sojourn in the Land[1] Message-ID: <38.00.27477.E0969AF5@mta2.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://www.torahweb.org/torah/special/2020/rtwe_sojourn.html This article was written by Rabbi Meyer Twersky "'He sojourned there' - this teaches us that our patriarch Ya'akov intended only to sojourn, not settle, [in Egypt]." I.e., this teaches for all generations how Jews must conduct themselves in each and every exile, that they should know that they have not descended to the diaspora to settle, rather to sojourn until the redemption (literally, end of days), and they should view themselves as non-citizens. (Meshech Chochmah, Vayikra 26:44) Civic loyalty to and responsibility for our country of residence notwithstanding, we recognize that the land outside of Eretz Yisrael is not ours. Our existential mindset and consciousness are that of an uprooted, displaced refugee whose real and rightful place is in the land of Israel. We must also be constantly, acutely aware of the dangerous reality of anti-semitism, both latent and active. While the world is blessed with the devout of the nations (????? ????? ?????), it is also plagued by the scourge of anti-semites. We must not be ignorantly lulled into a naive, false sense of security based upon our own very limited, mostly congenial, personal experience (for which we are very grateful to the United States). Instead we must be wisely, cautiously realistic, based upon our extensive, bloody, national-historical experience. Anti-semitism is very real, and easily ignited or excited. [As an aside, our generation, at times, lacks adequate historical consciousness. But that is a subject for another time.] II How did all this translate this year in terms of politicking? See the above URL for more. Mayer E. Twersky is an Orthodox rabbi and one of the roshei yeshiva at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary of Yeshiva University. He holds the Leib Merkin Distinguished Professorial Chair in Talmud and Jewish Philosophy. Wikipedia. He is a grandson of Rabby J B. Soloveichik. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk Mon Nov 9 14:23:45 2020 From: Chana at kolsassoon.org.uk (Chana Luntz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 22:23:45 -0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: <005201d6b6e6$fd4948a0$f7dbd9e0$@kolsassoon.org.uk> RLL writes: <<>From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? A. Regarding tzitzis, the Torah states, ?U?re?isem oso?, you shall see it (Bamidbar 15:39). The Gemara (Menachos 43a) derives from this verse that a nighttime garment is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. Because the mitzvah does not apply to nighttime garments, tzitzis is a mitzvas asei she?ha?zman grama (a time-bound mitzvah), from which women are exempt. The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended to be worn at night, such as pajamas. These types of garments are exempt from the mitzvah of tzitzis, even if worn during the daytime. Conversely, a garment that is intended to be worn during the day is obligated in tzitzis, even if it is worn at night.>> This has always seemed a bit strange to me - or at least, the Rosh and the Rabbanu Tam's explanation seemed strange, and my query seems strengthened by the (fairly) recently discovered view of the Imre Shefer, which would seem to be the basis for the Ramban's view that women are obligated in Sfirat HaOmer. That is: According to the Rambam, the ruling that tzitzit is a mitzvat aseh shehazman grama seems straightforward. The fall of night causes the mitzvah to be inapplicable, so the time clearly causes the mitzvah, just as the time of Rosh HaShana causes the mitzvah of shofar to be applicable, and the rest of the year it is not, in the case of tzitzit the time of day causes the mitzvah to be applicable, and hence it is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama. But according to the Rosh/Rabbanu Tam - it is not day or night that causes the mitzvah to be applicable, it is the type of garment. And yes, the type of garment is determined as a night garment or a day garment, but fundamentally it is not the *time* that causes the applicability of the mitzvah, but the nature of the garment. And the Imre Shefer says - " My father [R. Moshe ben R. David Chalawa (Maharam Chalawa) ca. 1290-1370] writes that sefirat haomer women are obligated, and this is his language in his chiddushim: every positive mitzvah dependent upon time men are obligated and women are exempt, that is to say all that depend on time, that is not every time is fit for it, and even a small interruption, that we learn from tefillin that the mitzvah is only interrupted at night that in any event this is a mitzvah dependent upon time and therefore we learn that women are exempt from kriat shema because it is dependent upon time, that is that they fixed for it a time in one's lying down and one's getting up a time of lying down and a time of getting up, and so with all that are dependent upon time. And the Ramban writes that sfirat haomer women are obligated in. And this is the essence, as they are not excluded except when time causes and sefirat haomer is not caused by time but by the action that is the bringing of the [korban] omer. And even though the omer is dependent upon time in any event the counting is not dependent upon time but on the action of its bringing and it is not caused by time. And to what is the matter similar, to women who are obligated in blessing after a meal, that behold Shabbat is a time that causes to eat as it is forbidden to fast, and since there is to the eating a time, the blessing on the eating could be considered to be dependent upon time, and it would be found that the blessing after eating is dependent upon time, ." So, according to the Imre Shefer and the Ramban - were it true as the Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh say that it is determined by the type of garment, would it not also be true that women would be obligated in tzitzit as it is not a mitzvah directly dependent upon time, but directly dependent upon the type of garment, which is merely classified by time? That would seem to make it even more remote from time than sfirat haomer. (Of course the Rambam disagrees that women are obligated in sfirat haomer, but then he would seem to hold that sefirat haomer is directly caused by the time, and so again would be consistent). So, given that we posken in the Shulchan Aruch that tzitzit is a mitzvah aseh shehazman grama (following the Rambam) as the Halacha Yomis stated (further following Rabbi Shimon and against, inter alia, Rav Yehuda - see Menachot 43a-b) should it not follow that we should posken like the Rambam against Rabbanu Tam and the Rosh on the subject of whether there is mitzvah to wear tzitzis on a day garment at night? Regards Chana From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:05:56 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:05:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109220556.GA13007@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 02:27:22PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From Today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? > The meaning of a nighttime garment is the subject of a disagreement > among Rishonim. The Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 3:7) writes that it refers > to any garment worn at night. According to the Rambam, the mitzvah of > tzitzis applies only during the day; any garment worn at night is exempt > from the mitzvah of tzitzis. The Rosh (Menachos ? Tzitzis 1) disagrees. He > quotes Rabbeinu Tam who maintains that a nighttime garment is intended > to be worn at night, such as pajamas... > Shulchan Aruch (OC 18:1) cites both opinions and leaves the question > unresolved. Therefore, Rema writes that one only recites the beracha on > tzitzis if the garment is intended for daytime wear and is put on during > the daytime. So does the AhS, he has an 8 se'if discussion, if you're interested to see more. RYMEpstein (se'if 2) also believes that the machloqes might also date back to one between the Sifri and the Y-mi on the one side, and the Bavli on the other. And unsurprisingly to those who remember RRW's posts about Prof.s Agus and Ta-Shema's theories about the origin of the Ashk / Seph split... The Rosh aligns with the Israeli sources, and the Rambam -- with the Bavli. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger For those with faith there are no questions. http://www.aishdas.org/asp For those who lack faith there are no answers. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yaakov of Radzimin - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 9 14:24:41 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:24:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201109222441.GB13007@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to Areivim from https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/headlines-breaking-stories/1916361 : > Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as > their voting booth station is in a local church and although residents > made efforts to have the location changed, they were unable to do so, > COL reported. > Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting > in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room > that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all > that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, > it is only permissible if there is no other option. > "One may enter a church to vote, provided it is not in the sanctuary, > but rather they specifically set up a room for this purpose, e.g. the > basement or a different room, since everyone knows that you are there > to vote and not for anything else," Rav Braun stated. And then RYL added: > See the above URL for more. > At one time my voting place was in a Reform Temple. I wonder what the > psak about such a place is. Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in order to participate in C services. 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 larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 10 07:40:56 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:40:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Entering a Conservative Synagogue was Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church Raises Storm References: Message-ID: <49.C5.01309.1E4BAAF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:24 PM 11/9/2020, R. Micha wrote: >Since this is a halachic question, I'm moving it here. > >When the Torah Center of Hillcrest was under construction, Rav Dovid >Lifshitz zt"l told R Zvi Flaum that it was okay to hold services in >the local C-nagogue's library, as long as we entered and left through >a different door than the C congregation and could hang a sign for our >shul by that door. Because then, it would be clear we weren't going in >order to participate in C services. Many years ago I was the featured speaker at a Chabad Shabbos that took place in a Conservative Synagogue. After I had accepted, I began to question the wisdom of what I had agreed to do. After all, almost all of those who would come to hear me speak would drive to the synagogue on Shabbos. I spoke with Rav Shimon Schwab, Z"TL about this. He told me that although Reb Moshe allowed observant Jews to teach in Conservative Hebrew Schools, he personally was against this. He said that he held that one was not allowed to enter a Conservative Synagogue OT to do anything that assisted a Conservative Synagogue in any manner. Rev Schwab was, of course, a follower of Rav Hirsch's Austritt policy. When I told him it was really too late for me to back out of my commitment, he told me I could go, but not to do it again. I followed his advice. YL From cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com Mon Nov 9 15:58:52 2020 From: cbkaufman at mail.gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 17:58:52 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot Message-ID: > "There is no indication that the girls (or for that matter the men) were to > be killed, or harmed in any way other than by being used as an object of > giluy arayos." Are you at all familiar with what happens to a women when she is gang raped by a small gang of about ten rough men? Ever worked in a city emergency room on a weekend night? Ever even watch Law and Order: SVU? If the woman remains alive it is by a thin margin. In our scenario there are thousands of angry men. The stakes are a given. [Email #2. -micha] > "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern > attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position > ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up > knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape. Yet your statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for all. I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound judgment. -- *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* From micha at aishdas.org Tue Nov 10 16:20:37 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 19:20:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Holy Door and Lot In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201111002037.GC25339@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 05:58:52PM -0600, Brent Kaufman wrote: >> "You're exagerating how different halakhah's position is than modern >> attitudes. Or more accurately, how different the halakhah's position >> ended up being when it was true that "darkah bekakh" and girls grew up >> knowing it was likely they'd be raped at some point," > But I am not exaggerating the mitzius of this type of rape... I was replying to Zev, so "You're" refers to him, not you. And I didn't talk about exaggerating the metzius, but the halakhah's posiiton. The fact that halakhah treats rape as a kind of assault actually fits current knowledge about rapists' motivation. And doesn't the least bit imply (as Zev tried to) that halakhah doesn't think it's a big thing. Assault is a big thing. > Yet your > statement about rape being a matter of course for every girl and how they > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. You made a strawman with "a matter of course for every girl"... What I wrote was that is was common enough to be less shocking than it is to people in developed countries today. Often enough that girls end up not growing up thinking their bodies were inviolate. Slaves and serf women were routinely abused by their masters. In Rome, waitresses, serving girls, entertainers were all considered available. Only citizens in good standing could even be "raped" as the law defined it. Soldiers also were not expected to be able to restrain themselves. This is the second time in as many conversations (the first being equating yam with seabed) that you were overly sure that something you didn't know was just something I must have made up. This time, though, the topic isn't lashon haqodesh or any other aspect of Torah, but history. So I don't want to clutter this list with the conversation. You can google historical information. 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 > handled it is completely made up. No one can therefore assume that it's > like getting a simple mugging to be taken in stride as a common thing for > all. > > I'm not sure that I even referred to Halacha in my question. I don't know > who would in that scenario. There was no choice about giving the girls. Lot > made that an option all by himself. Nor do I have reason to believe that > Lot would be concerned with halachic responsa on the issue. He, single > handedly, created the entire problem, from putting three strangers at risk, > endangering his family and daughters, and would be responsible for all harm > that came from the evening's events. He lacked self-awareness and sound > judgment. > > > -- > *- "When life gives you lemons, shut up and eat your lemons."* 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 10 08:35:35 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 16:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? Message-ID: From https://thelehrhaus.com/commentary/streamlining-services-what-can-we-learn-from-high-holidays-5781/ Streamlining Services: What Can we Learn from High Holidays 5781? | The Lehrhaus [1] See also Responsa Zekher Yehosef (Orah Hayyim Vol. 4, no. 213), which is cited in support for the position of omiting piyyutim. [2] It is intriguing to note that an abridged Rosh Hashanah service for Rabbi Akiva Eiger would still take five hours. [3] Translation is made accessible by Rabbi Dr. Edward Reichman in his article, "From Cholera to Coronavirus: Recurring Pandemics, Recurring... My goal is not to dictate policy to any particular synagogue. Rather, my hope is to provide halakhic sources in the efforts of generating a healthy discussion about how to make services efficacious and efficient. Unfortunately, the conversation about streamlining services is many times stunted. It is easy to halt such a conversation if we imagine that the only people who care about the timing of services are the people slipping out to kiddush club or the nudniks holding audible conversations in the back of the sanctuary. Because of this perception, many genuine synagogue-goers who come primarily to pray are beset with guilt for wishing that services be run more expeditiously. My goal is to show that there is little reason to feel ashamed, as many of our great rabbinic leaders shared a similar sentiment. See the above URL for the entire rather long article. In the interest of making clear where I am personally coming from, I have to say that I find much of the davening on RH and YK uninteresting and boring. Almost all of the piyut is kind of meaningless to me, even with the English translation. I am also not a fan of Chazonis, no matter how great a particular Chazon may be. These are my prejudices. [Email #2. -micha] From: Zalman Alpert Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 11:44 AM > I have to admit I find it interesting how you pick and choose from > Rav Hirsch > Rabbi Hirsch and FFM were and remain strong believers in piyyut KAJ ROSH > service commences at about 6:30 and concludes about 2at earliest > As you know liturgy was a strong point of R Hirsch,choir decorum etc > and it remains so although its in the decline > The structure of davening in Frankfurt are not in any manner essential > to TIDE. Hirsch was fighting the reformers, so he insisted that nothing > be taken from the davening. Hirsch spoke every week on Shabbos for a long > time. This was fine in his time, but it is not for most people today. I ran a Shabbos morning davening in the YI of Ave J that began at 7:15 and ended before 9 almost every week. No drasha, no long singing, just davening. This is the style for today. From mcohen at touchlogic.com Wed Nov 11 04:09:58 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:09:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Tahom Message-ID: <084101d6b823$9386a7d0$ba93f770$@touchlogic.com> Fyi - an interesting possibility/evidence for the source of the lower waters https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-hunt-for-earth-s-deep-hidden-oceans From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:34:51 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] These States? Message-ID: The Rama frequently use the term bmidinot eilu(these states) to describe where a practice exists. Much less frequently the term aratzot(lands) is used in the same context (actually only one I could find - see Y"D 39:18). Any ideas as to the (halachic) difference and why just in this one case? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 10 23:37:13 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 07:37:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] yishtadel (Try?) Message-ID: Rabbi Y. Sacks notes that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito")[struggle] is vishtadel[try] I see that other meforshim there focus on the intensity of the struggle. Worth keeping in mind when thinking of Yishtadel to daven with a minyan (ongoing, intense effort?) [the other places this term appears in S"A are Shabbat preparations and finding the right wife] KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 11 05:11:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:11:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? Message-ID: . According to how the OU explained the position of Rosh and Rabenu Tam: If daytime clothes must always have tzitzis (even at night) and nighttime clothes never need tzitzis (even during the day), then tzitzis seems to be very similar to mezuzah. In both cases, a whole list of technical criteria will determine whether or not the object needs this thing attached to it. In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. In the case of mezuza, the doorway needs to have a post on the right side, and be a permanent dwelling, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria then it needs a mezuza. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. So, according to Rosh and Rabenu Tam, Tzitzis should be no different from Mezuza as regards Zman Grama. I find this surprising because in actual practice we do exempt women from tzitzis. And not merely from the requirement to wear tzitzis, but even to the point of allowing them to wear four-cornered garments that lack tzitzis. Which part did I get wrong? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 05:56:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:56:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. May one wear a tallis at night? Also, if one took off a tallis katan at night, can it be put it back on? A. The Rema writes that if one put on a tallis at night, a beracha is not recited, because there is a dispute whether the mitzvah applies at night. The Mishnah Berurah (18:4) cites the Bach who writes that when wearing a tallis gadol (the tallis worn for davening) in the late afternoon, such as on Tisha B?av, it should be removed before nightfall. Otherwise, it might appear that the person intends to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis at night. Why will it matter if people have that impression? Teshuvos Ish Matzliach (1:15) explains that if one intends to fulfill the mitzvah at night it would be a violation of Bal Tosif (adding to a mitzvah) according to the Rambam who maintains there is no mitzvah at night. If one follows this explanation, it would appear that it is not permissible to put on a tallis katan (the small talis) at night after it was removed. Although one who is wearing a tallis katan need not remove it in the evening, that is because it is common to wear the tallis katan the entire day and not bother to change. However, putting a tallis katan back on at night indicates a desire to perform the mitzvah. Rav Moshe Feinstein (Igeros Moshe YD 2:137) offers a different explanation of the Bach. He writes that if one wears a tallis at night, it will give the impression that a beracha must be said. According to Rav Moshe, this concern would not apply to a tallis katan that was removed and then put back on (since a bracha is not recited on a tallis katan that is put back on during the day). Rav Moshe concludes that although there is no issur to put a tallis katan back on at night, it is unnecessary, and it would be preferable to not do so. The Bach points out that on Yom Kippur the minhag is to wear a tallis during Ma?ariv because we wear a tallis on Yom Kippur to resemble the angels, and not to fulfill the mitzvah of tzitzis. It is also true that a shaliach tzibur may wear a talis at night, since this is done for the honor of the tzibbur, and not for the mitzvah of tzitzis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 11 06:24:27 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:24:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?cp1255?q?The_Significance_of_Avraham_Avinu=92s_Perform?= =?cp1255?q?ance_of_the_Mitzvot?= Message-ID: >From https://seforimblog.com/2020/11/the-significance-of-avraham-avinus-performance-of-the-mitzvot/ This supposition that man can achieve perfection through belief in Jesus of Nazareth, as well as the belief that Jesus of Nazareth became a prophet[12] lacking the necessary Halachic requirements, is an intentional distortion and outright rejection of the fundamentals of the Torah, as explained above. Their main proof from the Torah: the statement that Avraham was righteous, and the statement ?All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you? Bereshit 12:3), were used as examples of one who lived before Matan Torah, and yet had the ability to achieve spiritual completeness without the performance of the mitzvot. In a direct refutation of these distortions, the Talmud states emphatically: Avraham performed and fulfilled all the mitzvot in the Torah, which include the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The Talmud brings a proof for this assertion from the verse: ??? ??? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ????? ? [Because Avraham obeyed My voice and observed My mishmarti, My commandments, My decrees, and My Torah] (Bereshit 26:5). The achievement of completeness and perfection of Avraham Avinu would not have been possible without the performance of the same mitzvot given at Matan Torah. Since before Matan Torah the only obligation for man was the fulfillment of the seven Noahide commandments, Avraham?s knowledge of the complete Torah and the mitzvot could only have been realized through prophecy, as explained and defined by the Rishonim.[13] The Talmud specifically references Avraham because the proof offered for this antinomic argument only mentions Avraham, and does not mention Yitzchak or Yaakov. It is probable that this issue was a prevalent theological debate of that era.14 Therefore, besides being a testimony of Avraham?s religious devotion and adherence to the mitzvot, the Talmud?s statement as to Avraham?s fulfillment of the entire Torah was a theological declaration as to the necessity of Matan Torah and the function of the mitzvot. And, consequently to categorically dismiss and deny what contemporary and current detractors of the Torah were and are teaching. See the above URL for the entire article. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isaac at balb.in Wed Nov 11 21:20:40 2020 From: isaac at balb.in (Isaac Balbin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 16:20:40 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] Crown Heights Rav's Psak On Voting In Church In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 01:32:58PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine forwarded to > Areivim from > : >> Residents of Crown Heights are facing a halachic issue on Tuesday as >> their voting booth station is in a local church... >> Rav Yosef Braun, the Rav of Crown Heights, paskened this week that voting >> in a church is only permissible when the actual voting booth is in a room >> that does not serve as the prayer room since it is then apparent to all >> that the purpose of entering the room is not for prayer. Furthermore, >> it is only permissible if there is no other option. Indeed. That brought back memories of when I was allocated a lecture theatre for my lectures at the back of a church. The entrance was through the front door and via the Church. I advised the University that I would not lecture there unless there was a back entrance, and they opened up such an entrance for me. The Church was prominent and in the Central Business District and I certainly didn?t want to be seen going through the front door given that most would not be aware that the Church had a hall at the back which they were renting to the University for commercial reasons. _________________________ "The student of Torah is like the amnesia victim who tries to reconstruct from fragments the beautiful world he once experienced. By learning Torah, man returns to his own self." - Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 12 10:03:15 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:03:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is there a mitzvah to wear tzitzis at night? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180315.GF20319@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 08:11:57AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > In the case of tzitzis, the garment needs to have four corners, and be a > daytime garment, and several other things, and if it meets all the criteria > then it needs tzitzis. But if it fails any of those tests then it is exempt. As I said on the 9th in response to RYL posting about an OU email on the subject (same email? same series?)... I HIGHLY recommend seeing the AhS's discussion of the machloqes. OC 18:1-8 If you missed my post of then, it's at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol38/v38n094.shtml#03 In se'if 1, he cites the Rosh (reish Hil' Tzitzis) that the fact the clothing is determined by time is enough to qualify as hazeman gerama. (I would also recommend joining AhS Yomi. We're about to begin Oz veHadar's vol II, so it's a good time to get started. See http://aishdas.org/ahs-yomi for a schedule and other tools (including RYGB's daily shiur, for those who need / want one), and there is a Facebook group if you want to be in contact with others on the program. It's an average of 1,100 words a day, which comes to 15-20 min for most people. RYGB's YouTube shiurim usually come in at just above 20. You get to be someone who is meshaneh halakhos bekhol yom AND have some intellectual "fun" of learning halakhah-as-process rather than as a list of rulings.) 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 Thu Nov 12 10:08:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 13:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201112180805.GG20319@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:02:20PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From a book review: > > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > > "Torah Only" versus "Torah im Derech Eretz" versus "Torah Umadda."... KMTT podcast just sent out some talks given at Gush by R/Dr/Lord Jonathan Sacks on the topic of how to find holiness after the gap year for those returning to college. His model is that one goes to university to learn what is univeral -- chokhmah bagoyim taamin. You got to yeshiva and learn after yeshiva to internalize the Torah that is particular to the human being. The only way to perfect creation, to bring ge'ulah to the world, is by fusing both. Similarly, you need rabbanim who not only know a lot of Torah, but know how to bring that Torah to day-to-day life. And so one's job in university is to learn the world with an eye to figuring out how to enfuse it with Torah. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Live as if you were living already for the http://www.aishdas.org/asp second time and as if you had acted the first Author: Widen Your Tent time as wrongly as you are about to act now! - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Victor Frankl, Man's search for Meaning From sholom at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 06:13:58 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 09:13:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment in his daf yomi shiur: What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls (Somewhat uncharacteristically, he didn't actually name any of the rishonim or give sources for that statement. That might have been because it was right at the very end of the shiur and he was running out of time -- or that he just wanted to slip in some general comments before moving on). Good shabbos! -- Sholom On Sun, Oct 25, 2020 at 1:51 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 10:04:12PM -0400, Sholom Simon wrote: > > Take a bridge that goes over a local road. Can we say that the side of > the > > bridge (presuming it is straight) forms a mechitza, and we extend > downward > > via gud achis? Or do we say pi tiqra because we treat the bridge like a > > roof? (I think you are explaining this, but I don't fully get it). > > Assuming the bridge has some kind of support running along the side to > invoke gud achis, I would think both are in play. But you don't need that > support to qualify as a mechitzah, since pi tiqra would would on its own. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Nov 13 11:33:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 14:33:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple eruv question In-Reply-To: References: <20201023210317.GC25622@aishdas.org> <20201025175151.GA23220@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201113193347.GA30815@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 09:13:58AM -0500, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > Just an FYI: on Eruvin 94, R Rosner made the following comment... > What is the lomdus of pi tikra? Some rishonim say it is just a fancy form > of gud achis; they put them together, even though the gemara doesn't put > them together. Others say, they are different, that maybe it's just a din > of havdalah. Meaning: you're not creating any type of structure by pi > tikra, you're just creating enough to be mavdil the reshuyos, which would > not be good enough, e.g., for a sukkah, where you need walls I would have put it this way... They're clearly different dinim... Pi tiqra is the edge of a roof, a horizonal surface. Gud achis (and gud achis) are vertical surfaces. Pi tiqra isn't a "form of" gud achis. The question is whether both dinim are motivated by the same metahalachic mechanics... I would think of the question this way: Gud achis and gud asiq imply a mechitzah. Lekhol hadei'os. Take them out of the machloqes. Does pi tiqra also also imply a mechitzah? In which case all three are different expressions of the same metahalkhah, doing the same thing working the same way. Or, is it only providing a well defined edge to the reshus under the roof? ("Havdalah", as R Rosner put it.) And thus different in kind and only usable for dinim that are about reshuyos. Sorry, it's too close to Shabbos for a research project to find which rishonim say what. If someone else doesn't beat me to it, I will try again after my commitments on Sunday. But I decided to post my current thoughts now, in hopes someone can fill that part in without needing to do research. :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger None of us will leave this place alive. http://www.aishdas.org/asp All that is left to us is Author: Widen Your Tent to be as human as possible while we are here. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous MD, while a Nazi prisoner From meirabi at gmail.com Sat Nov 14 22:09:59 2020 From: meirabi at gmail.com (Rabbi Meir G. Rabi) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:09:59 +1100 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek Message-ID: R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, that the targum for "vayeavek" (as in "vayeavek Ish Ito") [struggle] is vishtadel[try] R Chaim Veloshiner RuAch Chaim suggests it emerges from the word 'dust' as in a 'dust up' or 'raising the dust' when people wrestle they raise the dust. He therefore provides an astonishing interpretation that appears at first glance to run quite contrary to the first impression of the Mishanh - HeVey BeAfar RagLeiHem - implying the greatest form of humility and self abnegation possible R Chaim proposes it means that one wrestles with one's teachers - one must raise the dust and challenge one's teacher. Best, Meir G. Rabi 0423 207 837 +61 423 207 837 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sat Nov 14 22:21:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:21:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <369C8DD2-CAE7-45A7-A411-4289A25C823F@segalco.com> ?Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur ? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time 5:47: On the question of German reparations 10:23: The Kibud Av of Esau 22:24: The first story of Dama Ben Nesinah 31:54: The second story of Dama Ben Nesinah A lot to think about Kol tuv Joel Rich Sent from my iPhone THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 15 21:35:01 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 07:35:01 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Fwd: length of Persian era In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am listening to shiurim (TIM) by Rabbi Leibrag on the days of Ezra . He points to another reason why the dating of Chazal is not reasonable. According to Olam Rabba Ezra comes to EY the year after the second Temple is finished, Right before we have Zerubavel, Yeshoshia Cohen Gadol, Chagai, Zechariah and Malachi . So two or three years later Ezra comes (perhaps Nechamia before) and they don't seem to have any interaction with all these major leaders. Furthermore, Ezra is overwhelmed by the mixed marriages we don't seem to have been an immediate problem even if descendants of Yehoshua Cohen Fadol did intermarry, This is in addition to the problems of outside history which seems to match the names in Ezra and lists of high priests etc. He gives one reason for ghazal that according to their dating Yetziat Mizrayim is exactly 1000 years before the Seleucid calendar and so one who counts in the Greek calendar is also using a Jewish calendar. More reasons to come in later lectures -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Nov 15 22:15:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 06:15:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the word VaYeAVek In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just for clarification-it was R? Yonasan Sacks Y?L of Passaic KT Joel Rich -------------------- R Joel proposed in the name of Rabbi Sacks AH, +61 423 207 837 THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 15 08:05:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 16:05:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: >From the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/15/pushing-off-the-upsherin/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/IMG-20201114-WA0000.jpg] Pushing Off the Upsherin - Vos Iz Neias By Rabbi Yair Hoffman for 5tjt.com Question: A woman has a son with adorable blond curly hair. She is finding it enormously difficult to cut her son?s hair at age three. Can she push off the upsherin for this reason? Answer: Let?s first get some background. The minhag of delaying the first haircut is one [?] vosizneias.com I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf The tendency among Ashkenazi communities to refrain from this practice stems, according to one view, from the concern that the chalaka transgresses the prohibition of imitating pagan practices. Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among several nations in ancient times, and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan ritual. See the above referenced article for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 16 12:55:40 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 15:55:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201116205540.GC7625@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim and minhagim, just because you prefer them. There are arguments similar to the one you give about the origins of such minhagim as wearing costumes on Purim, which is originally an Italian minhag, and their neighbors were celebrating Carnivale around the same of year, as it marks the start of Lent. time as Carnivale. Or milchigs on Shavous, originating in Germany, where the neighbors had a holiday named Wittesmontag, a milk and cheese festival the Monday before their Pentecost. Either 1- You trust that our and Christian custom have a perfectly secular source, or 2- You hold that derekh emori can be buried under a sufficiently compelling symbolic tie to something mesoeratic, or 3- You just ignore such speculations, believing that Minhag Yisrael is protected from such influsences siyata diShmaya, and the researcher must be in error. Tir'u baTov! -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 zev at sero.name Mon Nov 16 11:23:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5bc835e9-1149-fa0b-6df6-8de6ff08b49a@sero.name> On 15/11/20 11:05 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Cutting a child's hair at the age of three was a well-known custom among > several nations in ancient times, Such as? Can you name any such nations? > and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of pagan > ritual. The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 16 09:19:28 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 17:19:28 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Education of a Torah Scholar Message-ID: The following is from Rav Shimon Schwab's These and Those that I have posted at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf Keep in mind that Rav Schwab left RSRH's "day school" before completing the 9th grade in order to study in Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Zalman's yeshiva gedola in Frankfurt. Two years later he went to study in the Mir and then in Telz. Yet he was known for his broad secular knowledge which he acquired on his own. He showed that there is no need to attend college in order to gain broad secular knowledge. Yitzchok Levine in the section "Mensch-Yisroel" The object of the true Torah education, therefore, is to make the student conscious at all times of this Divinely imposed task. To acquire Torah knowledge is our foremost duty, because without it, we cannot function at all. However, the prime purpose of all Torah study is its translation into conscious and enlightened Torah life. At all times must the unchanging teachings of Torah be applied to the ever-changing derech eretz. All of our actions, our attitudes, our relationships to man and beast and our positions within nature and history are subject to the jurisdiction and the evaluation of the Torah. What follows is that the Torah scholar should be well informed of the "ways of the earth." The laws of nature and the paths of history should be known to him. He should be well aware of what happens in the world which surrounds him, for he is constantly called upon to apply the yardstick of halachah and the searchlight of hashkafah to the realities which confront us. What also follows is that the greater the wisdom of Torah, the more mandatory it becomes that this wisdom be conveyed to the to a joyous acceptance of the yoke of Heaven. The Torah scholar must be able to dispel the doubts of the doubter and to counter the cynicism of the agnostic. He must, therefore, speak their language masterfully so that he can convince and enlighten them. There is indeed a dire need for gedolei Torah, great Torah scholars, who devote their entire lives to the study and the dissemination of Torah. The Jewish world today needs many talmidei chachamim whose lives' tasks are to enlighten it and inspire it with the love and the fear of G-d. We are ready to accord to those "messengers of G-d" the highest respects and a loyal following. These are the "honorary" Kohanim and Leviim of today. Like the members of the Levitic tribe of old, they are to serve all the other tribes and teach them the living Torah. Yet, education and leadership cannot function in a vacuum. Therefore, it becomes mandatory for the present day "Tribe of Levi" to initiate and encourage an educational system which can serve all other "eleven tribes" as well, and that means the vast majority of our people. It becomes mandatory for the Torah-conscious educator-not to inspire fear of the world and hesitancy to meet its challenge, but rather, to fortify the vast majority of our youth to meet head on and overcome victoriously the thousand and one pitfalls of professional and business life. Our youth must be inspired to courageously and intelligently brave the onslaught of scientific arrogance and the sensual poison that is masked as intellectual liberalism. The divine purpose for which Yisrael was created can be served in every capacity, in every profession, in all human endeavors, as long as they are not excluded by the halachah. During every period of our history we had gaonim who commanded authority within and became our spokesmen without. To do this they added secular knowledge to their profound wisdom. There is a colorful roster of immortal masters such as R' Saadya Gaon, Rambam, Maharal and so forth, all the way down through the ages to the Gaon of Yilna. They all successfully employed the so-called "outer-wisdom" as the spice mixers and the cooks for the royal table of the Divine teaching. What Rav Hirsch zatzal propagated is not really the principle itself as much as its introduction into chinuch, into the educational program for the Jewish school and for the growing youth. This is the true chiddush which Hirsch initiated! There were always learned adults who acquired positive attitudes toward worldly knowledge after they had mastered Shas and Poskim. But Hirsch innovated a school program for children, starting from the elementary level all the way up to higher education during the formative years of life. True, there was some Torah im rech eretz in the olden days. It consisted of all day Torah study with one or two hours thrown in for writing and basic arithmetic. The program of Hirsch expanded the scope of the derech eretz by adding the full secular school program to the curriculum. Ghetto life, with its restrictions and suppressions imposed from without, reduced the need for "outer" knowledge to a bare minimum. The derech eretz of the post-Ghetto society required much more time and attention. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Mon Nov 16 05:32:49 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:32:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan Message-ID: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> RJR posted (38/96): > Thanks to Ohr Publishing for these excerpts in Yiddish with English subtitles > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9DF-QIZ058 > From 1953 Yahrzeit Shiur? Historical Memory and Honoring Parents > 0:00: Importance of Historical Memory > 2:40: Modern man conquers space, the Jew conquers time > 5:47: On the question of German reparations ... When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years he conceded that he may not have been correct. Joseph From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Nov 16 05:39:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:39:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Rav as Darshan In-Reply-To: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> References: <09E193D3-BF8F-4C48-BD5A-58407B84949D@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: > When I commented on FB about the a Rav's position on German reparations > (he was against them), a number of people responded that in later years > he conceded that he may not have been correct. > Joseph Yes-I thought about mentioning that but I don't know for sure that there is direct evidence -- see R'HS here https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-02-10-september-1952-reparations-germany KT Joel From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Nov 17 00:41:41 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 03:41:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33.9E.01309.32D83BF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 05:35 PM 11/16/2020, R Micha Berger wrote: >On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 04:05:29PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > > I have to presume that this woman is not aware of the problems with > > the practice of not cutting a boy's hair until age 3. From > > https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/shorshei_hair_cutting.pdf > >Or, she knows her own posqim looked into the issue is an do not believe >the problems are real, or do not rise to a level to prohibit upsherin. > >There a numerous posqim other than those of Machon Moreshes Ashkenaz, >and this mother has no obligation to accept another's community's posqim >and minhagim, just because you prefer them. I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek.. Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to being influenced by the practices of those around us. Someone I know told me that he stopped putting on tefillin during Chol Moed because "Almost no one in shul puts them on." (For the record, the shul in which he davens has two minyanim on Chol Moed, one in which the men wear tefillin and one in which they don't. The tefillin minyan finds it increasingly difficult to get 10 to daven with it.) There are many other examples of this. People who never went to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. People who davened Nusach Ashkenaz have switched to Sefard, because this is what the nearest shul davens. Look at yeshivishe chasunas. They are virtually all the same. Rav S. Schwab once wrote that one could snap out the Chosson and Kallah at one of them and snap in another Chosson and Kallah and there would be no noticeable difference. Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 06:00:39 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:00:39 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Disposing of Tzitzis Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I have many old pairs of tzitzis that my children no longer wear. Can I throw them away? A. Shulchan Aruch (OC 21:1-2) writes that torn tzitzis strings and old tzitzis garments may be thrown in the garbage. However, the garments and strings may not be used in a degrading manner. For example, one may not use the strings to tie up a garbage bag or use the garment as a rag to mop the floor. The Rema is more strict and writes that the tzitzis strings should not be thrown directly into the garbage, since this is a disgrace for the tzitzis, but they may be allowed to end up in the garbage on their own. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 664:20) explains that one may place them in a bag next to the garbage for the garbage men to collect. This is permitted since the tzitzis were not thrown directly into the garbage. Mishnah Berurah (21:13) writes that this only applies to the strings. The garment itself may be thrown directly into the garbage even according to the Rema. Although there is no obligation to bury the strings, Rema writes that those who are extra careful to bury the strings, as is done with Sheimos (Torah writings), will merit a beracha. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 07:09:52 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:09:52 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b?Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b?Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. At the heart of the matter lies a controversially read Chayei Odom (Klal 19:1). Rabbi Avrohom Danziger (1748-1820) writes in his Chayei Odom: ?And the essence of Tefilah b?Tzibbur is the prayer of Shmoneh Esreh, that is ? ten adult people who will pray together. And not like the masses think, that the essence of praying with ten is just so that one can hear kaddish and kedusha and Barchu. Therefore, they are not careful to pray together ? they just ensure that there are ten people in shul, and it is a great error.? TWO WAYS TO READ THE CHAYEI ODOM Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l (1895-1986) addressed this issue in the years 1951 and 1952 in a series of Teshuvos. In Igros Moshe OC I #28, Rav Moshe understands this Chayei Odom as actually saying that all ten must be davening together and that if even one is not davening it is not full-fledged Tfilah B?Tzibbur. In the very next Teshuvah in the Igros Moshe is addressed to Rabbi Mordechai Spielman (1923-2007). Rabbi Spielman argues that the Chayei Odom could be read to indicate that the majority is davening. Please see the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 08:26:19 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:26:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? One of the outdoor minyanim in Far Rockaway will sometimes have people that have already davened. At times the speed of the minyan is not compatible with what that mispallel is used to and he will opt to daven later. Is that considered full-fledged Tefilah b'Tzibbur? The answer: It is a very good question and a fascinating halachic debate. ------------------------- The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:55:58 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:55:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL: > The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff is National > Director at Professional Career Services, a division of Agudath Israel > which functions in Lakewood. While not overtly supported by BMG, it is > known that many who have learned in BMG get job skills through this > organization. > As former BMG registrar and current Agudah employee, I can attest to how great this organization is and how successful its graduates are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' YL's point - if such programs exist (and they do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Nov 18 04:28:46 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:46 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Teaching your child a trade In-Reply-To: References: <80.4F.23873.30F54AF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <7D.7C.23873.FD315BF5@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 10:55 PM 11/17/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >R' YL: >The Agudah has such programs. For example, Daniel Soloff? is > >National Director at Professional Career >Services, a division of Agudath Israel which >functions in Lakewood. While not overtly >supported by BMG, it is known that many who have >learned in BMG get job skills through this organization. > > > >As former BMG registrar and current Agudah >employee, I can attest to how great this >organization is and how successful its graduates >are. That said, it speaks to the opposite of R' >YL's point - if such programs exist (and they >do, as he said), why should one worry about learning a trade at a younger age? > >KT, >MYG On the contrary. I would argue that this is one way that requires a father to make sure his son acquires the skills to earn a living. As far as "learning a trade at a younger age", it is incumbent on the father to make sure that his son gets the secular education when he is young so that he can participate in such a program. If a young man cannot read, speak, and write English on a reasonable level, do basic mathematics, etc. then he will have trouble participating in such a program and may not be able to complete. What is the failure rate for those who try to complete a course of study in the National Director at Professional Career Services? When Daniel Soloff met with me some years ago, he bemoaned the lack of basic secular knowledge of some who wanted to enter the program and even wanted me to teach a course in the program. Some years ago I tutored a chassidic young man who attended Touro College in basic mathematics. He knew nothing about fractions, percents, etc. and had failed the a required math course at Touro. As a result, he was not going to graduate despite having completed all of the other requirements for graduation. I was shocked at the fact that here was a grown man (He was married with a family.) who had such an abysmal knowledge of the fundamentals of mathematics. IMO it was his father's responsibility to have made sure that this fellow had been taught and mastered basic mathematics. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 19:32:19 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] chochma on hold: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: R' Joel Rich: > From a book review: > You will not find here comparative analyses of the various approaches: > ?Torah Only? versus ?Torah im Derech Eretz? versus ?Torah Umadda.? This > enhances the book because those arcane discussions have always been more > the province of scholars in their ivory towers than that of actual wage > earners out in the workforce. > Rabbi Lopiansky instead sets out a model elegant in its simplicity: The > time spent in yeshivah is a period in which a young man takes on the role > of Shevet Levi??a stratum of undiluted and uncompromised spirituality with > a minimum of interaction with the material world.? These years are ?the > stratum [that] becomes the core of our being.? The subsequent years in the > work world are years in which one must find his role as one of the other > shevatim??to know our mission in life and to realize it.? Such missions > must be solidly within the framework of osek b?yishuvo shel olam??the > constructive building and enhancement of the world.? > This reminds me of something R' Dovid Feinstein ZTL told me some 22 years ago. I asked him, if someone is capable of becoming "toraso umnaso" is he obligated to do so. He responded by asking me if I learned kol haTorah kulah, to which I responded that I had not. He motioned to me that I still need to learn. He added that in general, a person doesn't reach his full capability in learning Torah; even if a person learned kol haTorah kulah, he already forgot some of what he learned at the beginning and has to start over and learn it again. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Tue Nov 17 14:38:15 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:38:15 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov Message-ID: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 > From: Zev Sero > >> >> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >> pagan ritual. >> > > The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally > practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 17 21:44:55 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:44:55 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it as forever. Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Nov 18 08:44:20 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:44:20 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? Message-ID: >From https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/18/are-raw-apples-not-so-kosher/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 Recently, a family member purchased apples from Costco. The label on it states in small lettering that there is a coating on it which may very well be halachically problematic. After apples are picked off the trees, growers often wash them to remove bugs, dirt and leaf litter. Most of the apple?s natural wax is washed away dulling the apple?s appearance. A coat of edible synthetic wax is used to replace it to make up for it. Mostly, this is either shellac or carnauba wax. They help to both seal in the moisture and extend the shelf life of the fruit. But where does shellac come from? It comes from a beetle known as Kerria Lacca. The issue is not a new issue. What is new is that a growing number of organizations and people are taking the more stringent view. Why this has happened is another issue. But few can deny that the matter is of growing concern. THREE-WAY DEBATE The debate seems to be a three-way debate between Rav Moshe Feinstein zt?l, Rav Elyashiv zt?l, and Dayan Weiss zt?l. It concerns the Kashrus of confectioner?s glaze and other food resins that are used on hundreds of food products, including apples and candy, and come from beetles. So far, no kashrus agency has extended effort to research which apples are kosher and which ones apply the questionable coating. Until that happens, one can either choose to rely on the lenient Poskim or employ one of the following four methods of shellac removal. See the above URL for much more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 08:50:37 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 11:50:37 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Are Raw Apples not so Kosher? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is an old question from the 80's. Rav Belsky permitted it because the non-kosher ingredients in the wax are batel and are inedible. Gil Student -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Thu Nov 19 04:49:42 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:42 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I think it is most likely that she simply followed what she > saw others doing and did not even consider asking any posek. > > Mimetic Judaism is still very much alive when it comes to > being influenced by the practices of those around us. ... > > There are many other examples of this. People who never went > to a bonfire on Lag B'Omer now go. ... > > Following the crowd is a powerful human draw. Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Nov 19 12:04:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:04:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 05:44:55AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The phrase "ad hayom hazeh" (until this day) appears 76 times in Tanach > and "ad hayom" another 12 times. Some authorities understand it generally > to mean until the time the Torah was written while others understand it > as forever. I think this is related to the question of diberah Torah belashon benei adam. Which benei adam? Does this give license to say the Torah was written specifically to make sense to the Dor haMidbar? Or, that the Torah was written in a language aimed at all the generations of its audience? The difference is in approaches like R/Dr Joshua Berman's, where much of the Torah is explained in contrast to the AZ and politics of that era. See an interview with him for examples https://www.torahmusings.com/2015/03/qa-with-r-prof-joshua-berman/ (and he since came out with a book. But RJB is far from alone in this. But if DTbLBA means the language of the Ancient Near East, then when the Torah says "hayom hazeh", it has to be something that makes sense to an ANE reader. And needn't continue to be true afterwards. In general this approach demands that contemporary readers of the chumash read it keeping the times and other context in mind. That we are reading a book phrased as though it is for someone else Which is pretty much why I am /not/ in favor of that approach. It requires preserving way too much context, without which too much of the Torah's meaning is lost. The Torah is /for/ every generation, so why wouldn't be in /language equally meaningful to/ every generation? And thus keeping the phrase to mean that it uses human idiom. Knowing that "Yad Hashem" means His power, not that He has a Hand. Or using the word "raqia" doesn't mean that the Author was literaly describing a shell the stars were embedded in. Any more than Neil de Grass Tyson needs to believe in geocentrism to use the words "sunrise" and "sunset" -- something I once heard him talk about on YouTube. RJB finds his approach in the Rambam, From that interview: Do you have to have a PhD in Egyptology in order to understand the Torah? Can that be? In the Guide to the Perplexed (3:49), the Rambam expresses sorrow that he didn't know more about ancient practices, because that would have helped him better understand the Torah. There certainly are many things that we can understand today because of our enhanced understanding of the ancient Near East.... But li nir'eh that doesn't mean peshat in the pasuq. The Rambam is talking about the content of mitzvos requiring knowing what AZ was like, in order to better know how the Torah weens us away from them. Which, frankly, I have a harder time with than saying the text is written for its time. But that's a well known issue: How does the Rambam in the Moreh make it sound like the role of qorbanos is specific to weaning us away from a kind of AZ we don't see anymore, and yet still discuss the restoration of qorbanos and their being a mitzvah ledoros in the Yad? AND... The Rambam's use of DTBbA isn't even Chazal's use! R Yishma'el didn't say it about anthropomorphications, but about grammar. R Aqiva, who darshened al kol qotz vaqotz tilei tilin shel halakhos, who darshened the word "es", had 19 middos of derashah that looked at each word. RY held no, the words themselves are the normal use of language, it's their meanings we should darshen. Not that "akh" is a mi'ut, but is the meaning of a given word or phrase a perat? > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. History also has a known final state the Messianic Era. The colorless, pure potential of this world will be eventually assigned a meaning represented by the sky blue of techeles, of the vision of sapphire paving stones under the Heavenly Throne during the revelation at Sinai. (Shemos 24:10) People have free will, and therefore how the process unfolds is not fixed. And, like ink in water, it's hard to understand the purpose of any particular dance or spiral in the process of history. Still, the general parameters are known. We are tending toward equilibrium. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Circumstances don't make a person, http://www.aishdas.org/asp they reveal a person. Author: Widen Your Tent - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From zev at sero.name Thu Nov 19 12:35:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:35:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov In-Reply-To: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> References: <16056742950.e4cB1Fa.14023@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> Message-ID: <20f797d1-51f4-91f2-5777-6373467ed9be@sero.name> On 17/11/20 5:38 pm, Jay F. Shachter via Avodah wrote: >> Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:03 -0500 >> From: Zev Sero >> >>> ... and thus observing this practice may constitute an imitation of >>> pagan ritual. >> The fact that the AriZal and the Baal Shem Tov themselves personally >> practiced it should be enough to dismiss any such concerns. > Please explain the logic behind that statement. The logic is very simple. Maaseh rav. If they did something then it is impossible for it to be assur, and it is a chutzpah to suggest that it might be. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il Tue Nov 17 12:30:51 2020 From: ari.zivotofsky at biu.ac.il (Ari Zivotofsky) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:30:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5FB432FB.80108@biu.ac.il> Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > From > https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ >> What happens when not all of the ten people that have gathered for the >> minyan are davening now? Is it considered Tefilah b'Tzibbur? ... > The author was looking for yechaveh daat 5:7 see this article text and note 4: https://outorah.org/p/5704/ From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Nov 17 13:41:11 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:41:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Barely a Minyan in COVID Times Message-ID: In response to my email earlier today regarding the article at https://vosizneias.com/2020/11/17/barely-a-minyan-in-covid-times/ Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me the following > See this article text and note 4: > https://outorah.org/p/5704/ [By RAZZ. It begins: -micha] > Tzarich Iyun: Davening with a Minyan > Misconception:The main purpose of davening (praying) with a minyan is > to be able to recite devarim shebekedushah (prayers with the status of > sanctity), such as Kaddish, Kedushah and Barchu. > Fact: There are many advantages to davening in shul with a minyan: > creating community; davening slower and with more kavanah (concentration); > responding to Kaddish, et cetera, and hearing the Torah reading. But > the main halachic goal of praying with a minyan is to say Shemoneh Esrei > simultaneously with a quorum -- which is the technical definition of tefillah > betzibbur (communal prayer). See the rest of the article at the above URL. The footnotes are listed in one long paragraph form. From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 21:58:47 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:58:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Pushing Off the Upsherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Yes it is! And isn't that exactly how minhagim are *supposed* to work? > > Once upon a time, the traditionalists said Birchos Krias Shema exactly as had been done for centuries. And along came the innovators, introducing their Piyutim. Now, the traditionalists want to continue saying their Piyutim, and the innovators are more sensitive to the problems of Hefsek. > > Is one more correct than the other? Some say things must never change, and others say it is natural and normal. I prefer the middle road, where changes come slowly and carefully, and under the guidance of our leaders. > //////::::::: I think this is an interesting historical question as well.one often sees In halachic sources the phrase ubzmaneinu The practice has changed. I always wonder why and how. My guess is that it?s a delicate dance between the laity and rabbinic leader ship. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Thu Nov 19 22:33:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 06:33:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Does the latter interpretation mean that some avenues of free will > are foreclosed? According to the former, why bother telling us? Let me give a mashal from Widen Your Tent sec. 2.5 (I agree with the author on this point): When you drop a drop of ink into a cup of water, the ink spirals around in some chaotic pattern and eventually diffuses until the entire liquid is a uniform light blue. Even though each time you repeat the experiment the dance and spiral are different, something about the process in general is predictable. If you had different snapshots of the sequence that were significantly far enough apart in time, you could place them in historical order. Entropy always increases until it reaches the maximum. The system runs a certain way, reaching equilibrium. ------------------------------------- Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Nov 22 14:07:43 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2020 22:07:43 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Lag Ba'omer Upsherins and the sources of customs Message-ID: Please see https://www.academia.edu/12271408/Lag_Baomer_Upsherins_and_the_sources_of_customs?email_work_card=view-paper to download this article. >From the article Another minhag that takes place at the kever of Rashbi on Lag Ba?Omer is the upsherin. Rabbi Binyamin Shlomo Hamberger (Shorshei Minhag Ashkenaz 3:251-67) writes that there are several reasons to doubt that it is an old minhag, as there is no mention of this custom in any of the Rishonim. Furthermore, he shows that in the times of the Rishonim they cut a child?s hair long before the child was three years old. An early source given for the upsherin custom is the Arizal, in the passage quoted, where it is claimed that the reason the Arizal traveled to Rashbi?s kever on Lag Ba?Omer was to give his son an upsherin. However, Rabbi Hamberger and others point out this attribution is problematic as it is documented that the Arizal did not cut hair during the entire Sefirah?including Lag Ba?Omer. The second researcher says that this question could be resolved by saying that what the Ari did to his son, and what he himself did were two different things. Another possible solution could be that this story took place prior involved in Kabbalah. An early source for upsherin can be found in the Radvaz (2:608), but the upsherin was done at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi not at Rashbi?s kever. This would support the theory of the first researcher mentioned earlier that the minhagim of Lag Ba?Omer stemmed from the celebrations at the kever of Shmuel Hanavi. to the time that the Arizal began to be involved -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 13:41:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:41:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah is caused by human activity. RYMhK brings this a few times, one is on parashas Bo He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! So I was wondering what the MC would do with Yaaqov's statements in this week's parashah "akhein yeish H' bamaqom hazzah... mah nora hamaqom hazeh..." (Bereishis 28:16-17) But his comments here have to do more with explaining it in light of Hashem's statement at the seneh, "ushemi H' lo nodati lahem". Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The purely righteous do not complain about evil, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but add justice, don't complain about heresy, Author: Widen Your Tent but add faith, don't complain about ignorance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but add wisdom. - R AY Kook, Arpelei Tohar From micha at aishdas.org Mon Nov 23 14:53:32 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:53:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> References: <20201123214103.GA5757@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201123225332.GA20019@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:41:03PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Does he discuss why Moriah is different anywhere? Is it Avraham and > Yitzchaq's tefillos there that Yaaqov didn't even know about that made > his nevu'ah more possible? Kind of robs the original statement of most > of its rationalism. I also don't think it fits how the MC explains why > bayis sheini is qidshah le'asid lavo which is specifically because we > DIDN'T forget bayis sheini! Oy, I messed that up. This presumes Har haMoriah was moved to Beis-El. I don't think the MC's shitah even has that to fall back on. So, how does Beis-El (a/k/a Luz) qualify as a "beis E-lokim / sha'ar hashamayim"? Tir'u baTov! -Micha From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 17:43:44 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:43:44 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? I don't know the answer to that, but the question reminded me of some points that I've been keeping on my back burner for a while: 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land? And I'm sure others can come up with similar questions. "Gam zu l'tova" - Any time good results from a person's bad decision, was this part of HaShem's original plan? Or did He change His plan to fit the new circumstances? I'm confident that plenty of support can be found for all sorts of ways of looking at this. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:12:32 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:12:32 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > One of the more quoted thoughts of the Meshekh Chokhmah is his > idea that there is no such thing as inherent qedushah. Qedushah > is caused by human activity. It may depend on what we mean by "inherent" qedushah, If there is a qedushah that is automatic and it's been there since Bereshis, then where did it come from? Rather, something caused the qedushah to be there. But it doesn't have to be humans. Hashem put the qedushah into Shabbos, did He not? > He goes as far as to say that thinking that an object or > place can be inherently holy is already the beginning of AZ! Yes, of course. If "inherently holy" means that its holiness came from some source other than Hashem, then "beginning of AZ" doesn't even begin to describe how bad that idea is. Hmmm... If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or inherently sweet? These are qualities that the thing was made with. Someone *made* it large, or blue, or sweet. So too, someone can make a mezuzah, and it will be holy from the very beginning. But it's not an "inherent" holiness, because the sofer *put* qedushah into the mezuzah when he made it. So too, the apple is sweet because its Creator put sweetness into it from the beginning.There is no inherent qedusha; it has to come from somewhere. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:15:27 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:15:27 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Special places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: How does the MC?s clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has a completely different meaning in those contexts. But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input. In fact it has been extensively argued that the whole point of Shabbos is connecting to a kedusha inherent to maaseh bereshis. Ata kidashta, in the explicit words of tefila. As for kedusha of person, you could argue that the Leviim earned Kedusha by their response to the eigel. But what of Aharon and kedushas kehuna? He didn?t distinguish himself at the eigel. And even assuming that it was his otherwise sterling personality and midos which earned him and his descendants kedushas kehuna, can we really say that one is a direct result of the other? Doesn?t seem to be a clear enough causation From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:16:16 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:16:16 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?=93ein_anu_bekein=94?= Message-ID: The Rama frequently invokes ?ein anu bekein? (we?re not conversant?)as a reason we don?t follow something allowed by the Shulchan Aruch) Do you think this was an objective or subjective difference between the communities? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Nov 24 22:00:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 06:00:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Meaning of life Message-ID: I listened to a podcast from earlier this year interviewing Brian Greene a well-known physicist. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/108-brian-greene-until-end-time-mind-matter-our-search/id1352860989?i=1000468647766 If anyone has a chance to listen to it I'd be interested in hearing their thoughts, my understanding (or lack) follows. One topic was free will. Brian is a physicalist but tries to explain how we might have free will or the perception of it. I'm not sure I understood it and I'd appreciate some help. He also states that it's better to believe that there is no outside force that gives purpose to our lives because that allows us to determine our own purpose. If I understood correctly, we all look into our own gut to figure out what we feel gives our individual lives purpose. Ethics and morals also come from our guts but he does allow that other civilizations might have their own which differ from ours Very interesting however was how he allowed that saying Kaddish with a minyan when his father died was very meaningful to him to attach to the ancient tradition rather than something recently mad up. I've listened to a lot of similar podcasts and I still have not found the answer to the question that if you really believe this why not just do whatever makes you individually happy and not care about what anybody else or civilization thinks. Thoughts on how others think? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Nov 25 07:46:58 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:46:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9472ac04-bfae-8494-f21b-7ffccc661195@sero.name> On 24/11/20 8:43 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: > Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? > Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by > learning from that error? Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. The same applies to your second question. Had our ancestors entered the Land three days after leaving Chorev, it would have been good. What they achieved after 40 years in the desert was in some ways better -- except for the fact that they didn't immediately build the permanent BHMK. But even that will eventually work out, because when we finally do build it it will be better than it would have been. Basically all these boil down to the same question: the advantage of Baalei Teshuva over Tzadikim, or the advantage of the Or Mitoch Hachoshech, the light that comes out of darkness. Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. [Email #2. -micha] R' Joel Rich asked: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that > in total did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this > imply that HKBH would have to limit someone's bechira to reach > the end state? A simple answer is that that is so unlikely to happen that we need not take it into consideration. It's theoretically possible, but only in the sense that it's theoretically possible for all the air in a room to gather on one side, and suffocate those who are on the other side. In practice that is what we call impossible, and we never allow for the possibility that it might happen. The same would apply to the possibility, for instance, not only that the Mitzrim would refuse to enslave the Jews but that no nation would take their place. In practice that couldn't have happened. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Nov 25 12:20:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:20:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: <20201119200406.GA2562@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201125202002.GC19828@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 06:33:41AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? You started out talking about Be'er Sheva being called that "ad hayom hazeh". I replied by quoting myself talking about yemos hamashiach. Do you believe that the guarantee there will be a mashiach limits bechirah? OTOH, there is a kind of limitation of bechirah that you're probably perfectly okay with. You cannot choose to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps such statements about the future are based on HQBH knowing there is no way to avoid the outcome. Also, WRT my case (yemos hamashiach), there's the famous take on kulo chayav that Hashem would "step in" to do it Himself miraculously if we all choose not to. Can you do anything with these seeds to grow yourself an answer? On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 08:43:44PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > 1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was > "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was > "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning > from that error? I think that both were desired. Hashem's plan including bechirah means that the plan is more about given we do / become X, He will respond Y than any one path. Off topic: But I think that had Chava & Adam not sinned, there never would have been a split between olam hazeh and olam haba, and they would have remained in the one synthesis olam they were already in. RAYKook defines techiyas hameisim as a time when humanity gets beyond the illusion that olam haba, where the dead are, is actually a different place than "here". REED has a similar take about olamos, in which he says that the cheit changed Adam's perception, and it's perception that is the difference between olam ha'yetzirah and olam ha'asiyah, a world run by the laws of nisim and that run by those of teva. (MeE vol I, pp 304-312, "Olasmos deAsiyah veYetzirah", and vol II "Yemei Bereishis veYamei Olam" pp 140-154.) 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 cbkaufman at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 22:59:39 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 00:59:39 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Regarding the Tahom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I watch a YouTube channel about science explained in an enjoyable way which recently discussed the source of water on Earth, and it was focused on a new series of discoveries about water existing throughout the Earth's mantle and both cores; outer, and even inner. It posits that there is more water in the mantle than even that in the surface oceans. However, it isn't found in one contiguous body of water, but rather, embedded throughout the solid structure of rock and at the core, under so much pressure that it chemically bonds to the nickel in chemical bonds. Regardless of where this discovery is taken either in practice or theory, it is interesting to think about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfg3w2oBaFY Chaimbaruch Kaufman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Fri Nov 27 09:46:13 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:46:13 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: <56E1471E-F47F-4013-9168-1B5D7BBB8382@tenzerlunin.com> RAM suggested two different examples of analyzing possible desired end states: ?1) Looking from the perspective of Adam and Chava before they sinned: Was "the desired end state" an entry into Olam Haba the very next day? Or was "the desired end state" that they should err, and then grow by learning from that error? 2) From the perspective of the recently-freed Egyptian slaves: Was "the desired end state" a quick entry into Eretz Yisrael? Or was "the desired end state" that we should learn the lessons of 40 years in the desert, and of a lengthy conquest of the Land?? While both do raise interesting end state analyses, they?re very different. In the first, had they entered olam haba the next day, humanity?s existence would have no relationship to what actually happened; living in olam haba has nothing to do with living in the world that humanity has lived in since the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. In the second, while there may very well have been differences, the end result on both would have been that the Jewish people would have entered the land of Canaan and had to deal with the people living there, establishing a Jewish nation etc. etc. Joseph From eliturkel at gmail.com Sat Nov 28 09:31:51 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:31:51 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will Message-ID: I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham on free will (Hebrew) which are available on his website He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment that would prove determinsim. Given that there is no proof in either direction he founds it more reasonable that there is a nonphysical possibility for man to make free choices that then get translated into some action. He stresses that free will means that at times a person can choose his action and it is not determined by physics. That does not mean that one always has free choice. To prove determinism one needs to prove that man never has free will. Hence, the various Libet type experiments only show that under some simple laboratory conditions man is controlled by physics. The last in this series of talks will probably be this coming Friday morning (Israel tiume) and then saved on his website -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cbkaufman at gmail.com Fri Nov 27 13:14:05 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 15:14:05 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh Message-ID: >>Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve after thousands of years of work will be better. But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; rather, Adam's way was better. That is obviously problematic. The same, and even parallel, is the Sheviras HaKeilim (and it isn't my intent to take the discussion anywhere that the moderators would rather not) in which there is, embedded in creation, a need for a fall and eventual higher aliyah. Whatever was the original desired goal was, Adam achieved exactly what he hoped to achieve. It just would take longer than he expected; 6,000 years of billions of people and human history, as opposed to Adam doing the necessary teshuva and tikunim by himself, in a shorter time. Either way, it had to come through a sin, or it wouldn't have worked. >>Obviously "echta ve'ashuv" is not a derech. But bediavad it turns out that by sinning and repenting one ends up in a better place than one would have achieved without the sin. But this rise to a "better" way could only have happened through sin. *In effect*, HKBH said 'Yasher kochacha' to the sin. >>> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total > did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would > have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, mitzva dependent decisions... But even in those things which are mitzva/yiras Shamayim issues, we don't always have free choice. People are born into non-observant families have no choice, at least for certain periods of their lives, to keep or not keep Shabbos, kashrus and other mitzvos. Those neshamos were put in those situations for whatever reason HKBH had. Even things in which we think we are deciding, it could be that we aren't deciding, but HKBH just needed it to be that way. Chaimbaruch Kaufman -- *"Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur"* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:11:47 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:11:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] ad hayom hazeh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129181147.GA31712@aishdas.org> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 03:14:05PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: >> Both. The original desired end state was to go immediately, and that >> would have been good. But the end state that we will eventually achieve >> after thousands of years of work will be better. > But that is saying that HKBH's original way was less, or, not the best way; > rather, Adam's way was better.. Which is why I tried to suggest that had Adam not sinned, Hashem's response would have been the best way for for one kind of creature, since Adam did sin, Hashem's response was the best way for our kind of creature. And on the meta-level, the best meta-way was to let Adam choose which kind of creature he wanted for himself and his descendents to be. With neither plan being "better" because HQBH choosing one of the other would have been less bechirah than He Wanted to bestow due to the "best meta-way". >> Yes, but theoretically if each individual made decisions that in total >> did not get to the desired end state, doesn't this imply that HKBH would >> have to limit someone's bechira to reach the end state? > We do not have free bechira at all times. I don't remember the source but I > was taught that only in those things which are regarding yiras Shamayim, we > have bechira, but not necessarily in other things; i.e. moral choices, > mitzva dependent decisions... I suggested an easier way in which free will is limited: we don't have bechirah whether or not to fall if we walk off a cliff. My earlier example of eventually reaching yemos hamoshiach is of this sort... We could take the path of kulo chayav, and having made ourselves incapable of redeeming ourselves, Hashem forces redemption on us. But REED's concept of nequdas habechirah limits bechirah in a way different than either of our descriptions so far. He says that bechirah chofshi is only when we have choices that compete. When we are balanced enough pro and con for the decision to come to conscious attention and decision-making. So, for example, I hope none of us see a watch in a store and think about whether or not to shoplift it. The thought doesn't cross our minds, so it's not the subject of bechirah chofshi. However, for many of us the question of whether to rip off the government (by far more than the value of that watch) by lying on tax forms may very well become the topic of conscious deliberation. >From R Aryeh Carmel's translation in Strive for Truth: When two armies are locked in battle, fighting takes place only at the battlefront. Territory behind the lines of one army is under that army's control and little or no resistance need be expected there. A similar situation prevails in respect of territory behind the lines of the other army. If one side gains a victory at the front and pushes the enemy back, the position of the battlefront will have changed. In fact, therefore, fighting takes place only at one location. And: With each good choice successfully carried out, the person rises higher in spiritual level; that is, things that were previously in the line of battle are now in the area controlled by the yetzer hatov and actions done in that area can be undertaken without struggle and without bechira. And so in the other direction. Giving in to the yetzer hara pushes back the frontier of the good, and an act which previously cost one a struggle with one's conscience will now be done without bechira at all. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every second is a totally new world, http://www.aishdas.org/asp and no moment is like any other. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rabbi Chaim Vital - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 10:29:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 13:29:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic or > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better experiment > that would prove determinsim. Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to quantum randomness. Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. So the "free" part of free will is done. Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression of the will of the die. Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply random. And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, that "only" give us probabilities. If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers of interactions, it happens half the time. Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either deterministic or random. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The true measure of a man http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 13:25:25 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:25:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 29, 2020, 11:16 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't > follow > > it and small changes can make a big difference > > However it is completely deterministic > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove > > > > > More problematic > > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do > with > > free choice > > That was my point. > > So in summary neither chaos nor quantum theory disproves determinism. Otoh he shows why libet type experiments and other brain research does not prove determinism > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Sun Nov 29 11:27:28 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 21:27:28 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: He went in detail into chaos theory and quantum mechanics and showed that neither has anything to do with free will. Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow it and small changes can make a big difference However it is completely deterministic With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to macroscopic systems. More problematic is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with free choice RAM claim is that there is no proof for either detrminism or libertism. Since we we feel we have free will so that is the better choice but there is certainly no proof for free will. Again he has a whole series in Hebrew on the topic on his web site On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:29 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 07:31:51PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > I have listened to about 10 shiurim of Rav Michael Avraham... > > > > He analyzes determinism vs free will from just about every angle from > > philosophic to chaos theory to quantum mechanics to brain experiments. > > > > He basically comes to the conclusion that there does not exist any logic > or > > experiment that demonstrates determinism. All experiments have their weak > > points and he doesn't believe that one could construct a better > experiment > > that would prove determinsim. > > Yeah, but, that just proves the possitility of "free". > > I mean the brain is arguably a perfectly designed Chaotic System, with > 85-100bn neurons in complicated non-linear feedback loops. > > Definition: Chaotic System: A system that is unpredictable because > immeasurably small difference in initial conditions can create huge > differences in outcome. Because the system has feedback, which can > magnify a small change (or dampen it) in response to other microscopic > differences. Like the proverbial butterfly fluttering its wings in Africa > making the difference between whether or not a tornado develops in the US. > > But the brain is more than just chaotic. Because a neuron's behavior can > depend on stimuli on the subatomic level -- a single photon or electron's > state. Its microscopic initial conditions get down to quantum uncertainty. > > So the brain can end up in very different macroscopic states due to > quantum randomness. > > Then there is the No Cloning Theorem, an idea in Quantum Mechanics > which says that there is no way to copy an existing quantum state. > (Entanglement is something else, since that's about a *shared* quantum > state, not a copy.) No outside machine could ever determine what some > brain's qauntum initial microscopic state was. > > So the "free" part of free will is done. > > Now, define "will". Rolling a die and getting a 6 isn't an expression > of the will of the die. > > Free Will requires the mind to be both deterministic and not simply > random. > > And if the mind is not physical, how does it intervene in causing physical > effects without violating laws of nature. Even those, like quantum ones, > that "only" give us probabilities. > > If quantum mechanics says that the odds of something happening is .5, > the soul would have to interact with brains such that over huge numbers > of interactions, it happens half the time. > > Me, I think this middle ground between deterministic and random is > ineffible. I think R/Dr Moshe Koppel proves it exists in Metahalakhah > ch. 2, and I summarized his demonstration a number of times on-list > over the decades. One of which got edited and ended up on my blog > https://www.aishdas.org/asp/neither-random-nor-predetermined > > But I don't think we can say what it is. Because if we could describe it > in words, we could turn it into an algorithm -- and it would be either > deterministic or random. > > Tir'u baTov! > -Micha > > -- > Micha Berger The true measure of a man > http://www.aishdas.org/asp is how he treats someone > Author: Widen Your Tent who can do him absolutely no good. > - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Samuel Johnson > -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:16:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:16:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 09:27:28PM +0200, Eli Turkel wrote: > Chaos theory only says that the path is so complicated that we can't follow > it and small changes can make a big difference > However it is completely deterministic Not if those small changes aren't deterministic. > With quantum mechanics there is first the problem whether it applies to > macroscopic systems. Except that it /has/ to apply to macroscopic *chaotic* systems. Here's a good essay on the topic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0159 Quantum Physics Title: The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine Author: Scott Aaronson Abstract: In honor of Alan Turing's hundredth birthday, I unwisely set out some thoughts about one of Turing's obsessions throughout his life, the question of physics and free will. I focus relatively narrowly on a notion that I call "Knightian freedom": a certain kind of in-principle physical unpredictability that goes beyond probabilistic unpredictability. Other, more metaphysical aspects of free will I regard as possibly outside the scope of science. I examine a viewpoint, suggested independently by Carl Hoefer, Cristi Stoica, and even Turing himself, that tries to find scope for "freedom" in the universe's boundary conditions rather than in the dynamical laws. Taking this viewpoint seriously leads to many interesting conceptual problems. I investigate how far one can go toward solving those problems, and along the way, encounter (among other things) the No-Cloning Theorem, the measurement problem, decoherence, chaos, the arrow of time, the holographic principle, Newcomb's paradox, Boltzmann brains, algorithmic information theory, and the Common Prior Assumption. I also compare the viewpoint explored here to the more radical speculations of Roger Penrose. The result of all this is an unusual perspective on time, quantum mechanics, and causation, of which I myself remain skeptical, but which has several appealing features. Among other things, it suggests interesting empirical questions in neuroscience, physics, and cosmology; and takes a millennia-old philosophical debate into some underexplored territory. But I have to warn you it's more of a small book than an article. I'm in the 20s, the main text ends on 71. > More problematic > is that it replaces determinism by probability that has nothing to do with > free choice That was my point. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Man is equipped with such far-reaching vision, http://www.aishdas.org/asp yet the smallest coin can obstruct his view. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Yisrael Salanter - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Sun Nov 29 13:48:12 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 16:48:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] free will In-Reply-To: References: <20201129182939.GB31712@aishdas.org> <20201129211608.GC31712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201129214812.GA8155@aishdas.org> On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 11:25:25PM +0200, Eli Turkel via Avodah wrote: > > Not if those small changes aren't deterministic > That is meaningless. If one thinks the world is deterministic then the > small changes are deterministic. You can't prove free will by assuming > small changes are not determined. You are assuming what you want to prove No, I am combining two ideas you are insisting on treating separately: The effects of Chaos on a Quantum Mechanical system. The small changes are on a quantum uncertainly level. So, Chaos will magnify quantum effects to macroscopic level. I am not assuming quantum uncertainty; I am taking it for granted that verifications of Bell's Inequality have ruled out "hidden variables" and other deterministic models. This is experimental data, not an assumption. And thus even if quantum randomness can't exist on a macroscopic level, and the wave function collapses into some classical state Chaos Theory will tell us that those classical states need not resemble each other. I wrote about Libet here in the past. See a couple of explanations at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol25/v25n344.shtml#03 Libet concluded that there is a 300 to 500 ms (roughly 1/3 - 1/2 sec) delay between making a decision and consiousness. That the neurons actually choosing to move of not fire first, then we make up explanations to ourselves to align them with our "will". The latter just being a fiction we tell ourselves. I like the idea that Libet measured the time lag between making a free will decision and realizing one has just watched themself making that free will decision. (Which is likely why I chose that quote to put last.) Libet was off by one level of meta. Alternatively, REED wouldn't expect the kind of arbitrary choice like when to press a button to involve free will. It doesn't reach the nequdas habechirah. Only decisions that involve warring interests that push themselves to awareness, concious choice, and bechirah chofshi. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Like a bird, man can reach undreamed-of http://www.aishdas.org/asp heights as long as he works his wings. Author: Widen Your Tent But if he relaxes them for but one minute, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF he plummets downward. - Rav Yisrael Salanter From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Nov 30 13:26:22 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 16:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Yaakov and Lavan Message-ID: I found enjoyable an essay over last shabbos on the parsha: R Yitzchak Etshalom, ?Shades of White: A Fresh Look at Lavan?s Relationship with Yaakov?, https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/shades-of-white-a-fresh-look-at-lavans-relationship-with-yaakov/ I suspect it might be in his book series ?Between the Lines?, which I don't have. -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Nov 30 09:25:15 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 17:25:15 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states, ?One who eats in a marketplace is like a dog. Some say he is ineligible to testify in court. Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha follows ?Some say? (that such individuals may not bear testimony).? The Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. To many people, eating in a marketplace might seem benign, and therefore, the comparison to a dog appears extreme. In truth, the Torah demands high levels of refinement from human beings who are created bitzelem Elokim (in the image of G-d), and these statements of Chazal should be appreciated in this light. Presumably, the comparison to a dog is because dogs are not shy in their eating habits, and they pounce upon food wherever they find it. Human beings are not animals, and the consumption of food should be done with dignity and finesse. A person who conducts himself ?like a dog? compromises his tzelem Elokim. Contemporary culture has broken many barriers of decency and studying these halachos serves to strengthen our sensitivity. Even so, the invalidation of such an individual from being a witness is difficult to comprehend. The great twelfth century posek, Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash, writes (Teshuva 159) that one who eats in the market does not violate any specific Torah law. If so, why is this person excluded from giving testimony. Rashi addresses this issue (Kidushin 40b) and explains that a person who acts in this manner cares little about personal dignity and will not be concerned about becoming an eid posul (an invalidated witness) if he commits perjury. It appears from Rashi that the presumed integrity of a witness is based on the natural embarrassment that a person might experience if labeled an eid posul. One who degrades himself in public is shameless and cannot be trusted to testify. Rav Yoseph Ibn Migash notes that this invalidation of a witness is not limited to eating in the marketplace but includes any other public display of strange or embarrassing behavior. The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham. Poskim ask that this implies that only a talmid chachom must avoid such activity. This would appear to contradict the Talmud Bavli (the Gemara in Kidushin quoted above) which implies that eating in the market is inappropriate for everyone. Poskim offer various responses. The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, where there are only a few people. Only a talmid chochom is restricted from doing so. On the other hand, the Bavli is dealing with eating in the central area of the market where everyone can see him. Everyone is restricted and becomes ineligible to testify in court if they eat in this manner. (To be continued.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 11:05:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:05:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:25:15PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > > > Q. Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? > >> A. The Gemara (Kidushin 40b) ... Rav Idi Bar Avin said, the halacha >> follows 'Some say' (that such individuals may not bear testimony)." The >> Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (CM 34:18) both rule in >> accordance with Rav Idi Bar Avin. ... >> The Yerushalmi (Maseros 3:2) relates that Rebbi Elazar bar Rebbi Shimon >> was eating in the marketplace and Rebbi Meir stopped him and told him >> that such behavior was unbefitting of a talmid chacham.... The Shulchan >> Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18, see Sema ibid. 44) follows the opinion >> that the Yerushalmi is discussing eating in a side area of the market, >> where there are only a few people. ... On the other hand, the Bavli is >> dealing with eating in the central area... This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of talmidei chakhamim. Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out with dirty clothes did then. So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present himself apply to all of us? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger There's only one corner of the universe http://www.aishdas.org/asp you can be certain of improving, Author: Widen Your Tent and that's your own self. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Aldous Huxley From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 1 06:25:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:25:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outdoor Seating Message-ID: >From today's OU Halacha Yomis Q. Some restaurants set up tables and chairs outside on the sidewalk. Is there any issue with eating in public if one is seated? A. We previously quoted the Gemara (Kiddushin 40b) that one who eats in the marketplace is displaying the behavior of a dog, and one who does so is invalidated from testifying in court. Since the Gemara does not differentiate between walking, standing, or sitting, it would appear that all of these are inappropriate. However, the Rambam (Hilchos Eidus 11:5) and Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 34:18) write that one who eats while walking through a marketplace is invalidated from testifying, which indicates that eating in a marketplace is acceptable if one is seated. On this basis, Rav Yitzchak Zilberstein (Chashukai Chemed, Brochos 50a) writes that eating in at a sidewalk caf? or restaurant is acceptable, as one typically eats while seated. Nonetheless, Rav Zilberstein notes that there is a higher standard for a talmid chochom. The Rambam (Hilchos Deiyos 5:2) writes that a talmid chacham should only eat at a home while seated at a table, and he should not eat in a store or in the marketplace unless there is a great need. It is clear from the Rambam that a talmid chacham should not eat in a marketplace even when seated. As such, a talmid chochom should not eat at a sidewalk restaurant. Rav Zilberstein makes a similar distinction regarding eating on a bus. For the general public it is acceptable since they are seated (provided other passengers are not offended), but a talmid chacham should avoid doing so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 1 12:31:06 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:31:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] rosh hashana In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201201203106.GA28948@aishdas.org> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:24:31PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > Rosh Hashanah has been difficult for me for a long time. Rosh Hashana > is both a Yom Din and a coronation night(malchiyot)... Here's my pet theory... The point of malkhus is in contrast to memshalah. "Ein melekh belo am" -- a melekh requires the acclimation of the people. Hashem rules either way. The key is to accept His rule, to take the memshalah and turn it into melukhah. The Gra makes this point from pesuqim like Ki Lashem hamlukhah -- we declare umosheil bagoyim -- even those nations that don't accept His rule. Until the day when .. vehayah H' leMelekh al kol ha'aretz... And so Malkhusekha malkhus kol olamim umemshaltekha bekhol dor vador -- unaccepted memshalah has a more limited "from generation to generation" compared to the Eternity of Divine Malkhus. Because it's only until the messianic age and the "bayom hahu" described in the above pasuq from Zekhariah (and said after Aleinu). One difference between a mosheil who rules regardless of the will of the people and a melekh who has their support is that the melekh has less call to impose his will despite their desires. Even if the mosheil is benevolent, he cannot rely on public support so his methods will be less accepted by the masses. Which is why the mashal of Rosh haShanah is that of a king sitting in judgment -- but this King is "sitting" on a "Kisei Rachamim". And so, the first step of din is geting on the same page as the Dayan. Especially if I want a sentence that doesn't involve as many things happening despite not wanting them to. 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 Wed Dec 2 11:40:05 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:40:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem Message-ID: . I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the place to ask my question in general terms: If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about such things. This is especially true if the perpetrator of the Chillul Hashem is someone who the audience perceives as an admirable frum Jew. One's brain - or at least a tiny part of it - will inevitably be influenced to think that "If such a person is doing it, it can't be so terrible." This desensitization - this lessening of respect for Hashem and His Torah - is the very definition of Chillul Hashem. If someone already knows about the event, then his mind has already been poisoned, and we must act like Pinchas, to mitigate the damage to whatever extent we can. But telling the blissfully ignorant - I see no positive value to such a thing. Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:39:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:39:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 1 20:41:54 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 04:41:54 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom shenahagu....Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the reason "mpnei machloket"(avoid discord?). What specific type actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 1 13:51:10 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2020 16:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> References: <20201201190503.GC28625@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 02:05 PM 12/1/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >This raises a recurring question WRT chilul hasheim and the behavior of >talmidei chakhamim. > >Nowadays, when shomerei Torah umitzvos are a minority, anyone dressed >identifiably like an Orthodox Jew is seen as representing Torah. Much >the way talmidei chakhamim were seen by the masses in the classical >period. An Orthodox-dressed Jew who goes out looking like a shlump >creates pretty much the same impression today that a TC who went out >with dirty clothes did then. > >So, how many of the laws of how a TC should behave and should present >himself apply to all of us? I posted a somewhat long piece from Rav Schwab's These and Those about the requirements of being a Torah scholar. See https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/these_and_those.pdf for all of These and Those. See pages 13 and 14 and then ask yourself how many people are Torah scholars according to these requirements. I am often called "rabbi" although the only semicha I have received was given to me many years ago from the Meal Mart that used to be on Ave J in Flatbush, and the recent semicha I received from the Flatbush Jewish Journal! >:-} Nonetheless, I think that it is crucial that people who look like observant Jews behave, act and l dress as though the world was judging Judaism by watching them. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Wed Dec 2 06:21:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:21:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Eating Outside, Restricted Foods Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. As noted, the Gemara (Kidushin 40b) states that those who eat in the marketplace are disqualified from testifying in court. Which foods are restricted? A. The Beis Yosef( Choshen Mishpat 34) cites the opinion of Rabbeinu Tam that the restriction of eating in a market is limited to achilas keva (a bread-meal), but he does not accept this leniency. According to the Beis Yosef all types of foods are included. However, the Aruch Hashulchan (CM 34:18) rules like Rabbeinu Tam. The Aruch Hashulchan also accepts the lenient opinion of the Bach, that the prohibition of eating is applicable only if done on a regular basis, but not when done on occasion. However, the Bach writes that a talmid chacham should not walk and eat outside. The Bach writes that a talmid chacham should also not drink while walking outside in public. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Thu Dec 3 06:04:17 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:04:17 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". ------------------------------------- Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Thu Dec 3 03:36:41 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom Message-ID: . R' Joel Rich asked: > When the mishna tells us that we need to keep local custom (makom > shenahagu... Al yishaneh adam mpnei hamachloket) it gives the > reason "mpnei machloket" (avoid discord?). What specific type > actions/statements were Chazal concerned about in terms of discord? I don't have an answer, but I do have a similar question, and perhaps an answer might be found by comparing them. There are certain situations where we are told to act in a unified manner because of "lo tisgodedu". Is this the same thing as "mpnei machloket" or is it something different? Regarding which days of the Sefira period are of an aveilus nature, Rama 493:3 says that because of "lo tisgodedu", each locale should follow one minhag or the other. The Dirshu Mishne Brura, note #33 on the above, points out something very relevant: Shulchan Aruch Harav 493:7 (near the end) says that if many people of the area follow one minhag, and many people of the area follow the other minhag, and so they are not makpid on each other, so there is no fear of machlokes -- even so, "lo tisgodedu" still applies. Interestingly, regarding a place which has mixed minhagim about tefillin on Chol Hamoed, Mishne Brura 31:8 cites both machlokes (near the beginning) and lo tisgodedu (near the end). I recently came upon another situation where I can't imagine any machlokes arising, yet the halacha is worried about lo tisgodedu: Beis Yosef (OC 114, near the beginning of "Umah shekasav v'itmar b'Yerushalmi") asks why Mashiv Haruach starts and stops at Musaf on Yom Tov, why not follow the calendar and switch at Maariv the night before? His answer is that "Not everyone is in shul in the evening, and it will turn out that this one says it and that one doesn't say it, and it will be agudos agudos." (I'd love to know why this doesn't apply to any of the other changes in the siddur, and if anyone wants to start a new thread about that, I'd appreciate it.) To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com Wed Dec 2 19:47:51 2020 From: hmaryles at mail.yahoo.com (Harry Maryles) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 21:47:51 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73BBAD3C-0974-4B9B-BCD4-277E2BA6A7CB@yahoo.com> On Dec 2, 2020, at 8:50 PM, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I'm currently discussing a specific event on Areivim, and this is the > place to ask my question in general terms: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest > it to the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable > such behavior is. I think Pinchas is an adequate demonstration of this. > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it > a chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can > tell them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? There are several issues to consider. For one thing if someone commits a CH, it rarely stays confined to the people who witnessed it. To keep it confined only to the people who you know saw it risks giving a message to others that might have also seen it that Judaism is OK with what happened. And if it becomes known due to media publicity, then in my view it must be protested in kind. The more people that hear your condemnation the less of a risk that bad behavior will be seen as acceptable to us, thus contributing to the CH. Now if you are absolutely certain that nobody saw it, (which I?m not entirely sure is even possible) then publicizing it has no Tachlis. But that does not let you off the hook. You still have to give hochacha to person who did it to prevent him from doing it again. The one thing you can never do in the face of a CH is to ignore it. My two cents. HM Sent from my iPhone, Shirley. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 11:00:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] local custom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203190059.GC6189@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:04:17PM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > > To return to RJR's question, it seems from the Shulchan Aruch Harav > > that "mpnei machloket" is exactly what it sounds like. If everyone is > > accepting of the differences, then "mpnei machloket" is not a problem > > (although "lo tisgodedu" might still apply). But if the situation is > > such that machloket could arise, that's "mpnei machloket". > > Which raises the question does/should this vary by community and time? I didn't take it that way... I took it as an answer. "Mipenei machloqes" is all about whether or not people actually do argue about some split in practice. It's all situational by definition. Tangentially (maybe): I suggested in the past that the way Sanhedrin was set up, the same was true of which topics Sanhedrin pasqened on. Not talking legislation, but pesaq. Why was there no resolution for (e.g.) what was the right order for parashios in tefillin during bayis sheini? We know from archeology there were at least three different practices, including "Rashi" and "Rabbeinu Tam" orders. And yet the question is still open in the days of rishonim! Well, if an LOR was comfortable with a question, he wouldn't have reffered the question to the town's beis din. And if the town's beis din was okay, it wouldn't go up the ladder to the sheivet's beis din. And so on to the beis din outside the BHMQ up to the Sanhedrin itself. The second way a question could reach the Sanhedrin is if the question spanned multiple jurisdictions. Like if two shevatim were involved in a dispute. Or, if a question about a din requiring a pesaq came from multiple quarters. So, Sanhedrin or the beis din in front of the BHMQ only gave one national answer if either: - the question was too complicated for a lower court, or - the arguing wouldn't stop if there wasn't a single national ruling. And without an argument, many questions would just continue going with multiple right answers and regional practices. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 3 12:51:51 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:51:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Publicizing a Chillul Hashem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201203205151.GD6189@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 02:40:05PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If someone commits a public Chillul Hashem, of course we must protest it to > the onlookers, to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such > behavior is.... > > My question concerns the people who DON'T know about the event. Is it a > chiyuv / mitzva / good idea to inform them about this, so that we can tell > them how awful it was and that they should not do such things? I think the case in question more people did than you considered, since RYL was repeating a news report. But that's tangential... I want to complicate the question... Let's say people don't know about the event. But they know about a pattern that the event seems to fit. E.g. not that Rabbi Y lied to the government to illegally get money to keep his yeshiva open, but that these things happen too often. Or not about a given funeral or wedding that was too crowded and maskless for the middle of a pendemic, but they do know that there are many such events. Don't you still need to impress on everyone how awful and "to impress upon them how awful and unacceptable such behavior is"? And that we must be on the alert and be vocal in our communities because there are more cases than they knew of? > My feeling is that one should NOT tell other people about it, because that > very act will be a Chillul Hashem itself (or at least akin to Chillul > Hashem) because this new information will tend to desensitize people about > such things.... And I was thinking that if in your first case, we cry out to increase sensitivity, someone hearing about the event with a concurrent "how horrible!" would be kept sensitive to "such things", the worrying pattern of which the event in question is but one example. Also, is the chilul hasheim the telling of the story, or the fact that there is a true story to tell? Is motzi sheim ra falsely alleging that something outrageous was done qualify as a chilul hasheim? > Are there any sources that anyone can suggest which discuss this question? Request seconded. Tir'u baTov! -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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 6 06:06:24 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 14:06:24 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Authentic Judaism Message-ID: >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shimon_Schwab [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Ravschwab1.png] Shimon Schwab - Wikipedia Shimon (Simon) Schwab (December 30, 1908 ? February 13, 1995) was an Orthodox rabbi and communal leader in Germany and the United States.Educated in Frankfurt am Main and in the yeshivot of Lithuania, he was rabbi in Ichenhausen, Bavaria, after immigration to the United States in Baltimore, and from 1958 until his death at Khal Adath Jeshurun in Washington Heights, Manhattan. en.wikipedia.org CIS Publications published 3 volumes of Rav Schwab's speeches and writings, namely, Selected Writings, Selected Speeches, and Selected Essays. IMO the material in these books should be read by every observant Jew. Unfortunately, these books are out of print. Rav Schwab's essay Authentic Judaism deals with Chanukah appears in Selected Essays which was published in 1994. It begins with "Bayamin haham baz'man Ha Zeh." These words describe the neis Chanukah that occurred years ago, but in truth, there is an ongoing struggle for authentic Judaism today as well. We are fighting a battle against contemporary Misyavnim, and a strategy must be formed in order to win over their misguided victims. Well, this is a difficult task. As of today, in spite of our optimism, the American Jewish population numbers over six million, kein yirbu, and less than seven percent identify themselves as Orthodox. This translates to less than five hundred thousand Orthodox Jews in the entire United States. So instead of the Misyavnim in our midst, we are in the midst of the Misyavnim. The Misyavnim of today are the contemporary gravediggers of the tinokos shenishbu bein ha 'akum, innocent Jewish neshamos, who are victimized by a spiritual holocaust sheain dugmaso. We should not lose sight of the fact that this spiritual holocaust is not happening in Russia or under any atheistic dictatorship. It is right here in the United States, within the framework of a benign democracy with religious freedom, and it is not imposed upon us by bordering on anarchy. The once powerful leaders of this accursed country are now begging for financial handouts from the capitalistic European and American governments in order to feed their hungry citizens. You can read the entire essay at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqr6kpcXpxWI0OALB8s1NjFS2Jw8xSoB/view [https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Ki3nte0koJaXv8R2ZREzc-FsZx48ZIFuEfo3xDZgb1rDALR8Q69mdTCt0HM0kdo=w1200-h630-p] Authentic Judaism Rav Shimon Schwab Selected Essays 9.pdf drive.google.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From marty.bluke at gmail.com Sun Dec 6 09:19:09 2020 From: marty.bluke at gmail.com (Marty Bluke) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 19:19:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating habits were very different then ours. We no longer eat reclining and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat outside then chazals dictate should not apply. Truthfully, this opens a different can of worms regarding berachos as well. For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind of bent for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer considered a respectful form of dress. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca Fri Dec 4 02:11:35 2020 From: ari.brodsky at utoronto.ca (Ari Meir Brodsky) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 12:11:35 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Saturday evening begin Prayer for Rain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Friends, It's that time of year again, when I know many of you are expecting my annual friendly reminder.... Jews outside of Israel should include the request for rain in daily prayers, beginning with Maariv this motzei Shabbat (Saturday evening), December 5, 2020, corresponding to the evening of 20 Kislev, 5781. The phrase *??? ?? ???? ?????* "Veten tal umatar livracha" - "Give us dew and rain for a blessing" is inserted into the 9th blessing of the weekday shemone esrei, from now until Pesach. [Sephardim replace the entire blessing of ????? with the alternate text beginning ??? ????? - thanks to Prof. Lasker for the reminder.] I encourage everyone to remind friends and family members of this event, especially those who may not be in shul at that time. Diaspora Jews begin requesting rain on the 60th day of the fall season, as approximated by Shmuel in the Talmud (Taanit 10a, Eiruvin 56a). This year, the calculated beginning date falls on Shabbat, so that the request for rain, which is part of the weekday prayers only, begins after Shabbat. For more information about this calculation, follow the link below, to a fascinating article giving a (very brief) introduction to the Jewish calendar, followed by a discussion on why we begin praying for rain when we do: https://www.lookstein.org/professional-dev/veten-tal-u-matar/ (Thanks to Russell Levy for suggesting the article.) In unrelated news: If you're wondering why Yaakov sent Eisav 220 goats in this week's parasha, follow this link for an explanation using some number theory: http://cheshbon.weeklyshtikle.com/2010/11/goats-and-amicable-numbers.html Wishing everyone a happy Chanukka (which will begin on a Thursday evening this year, for the first time in 20 years). Stay healthy! -Ari --------------------- Dr. Ari M. Brodsky Lecturer, Mathematics Department Shamoon College of Engineering Be'er Sheva, ISRAEL ?"? ???? ???? ??????? ????, ?????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ?"? ??? ????? ??? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 4 06:36:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2020 14:36:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?V=92sain_Tal_Umatar?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This Motzei Shabbos, December 5th, we begin reciting V?sain Tal Umatar in the Shmoneh Esrei of Maariv. What happens if one forgot to say V?sain Tal Umatar and what is the halacha if one is uncertain? A. If a person said ?v?sain bracha? instead of ?v?sain tal umatar livracha? and he realized his error after ending Shmoneh Esrei, the entire Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. If the error was caught while in the middle of Shmoneh Esrei, corrective action may be taken by inserting the phrase of v?sain tal umatar livracha in the bracha of Shema Koleinu, before the words ?Ki ata shomeiya?. However, if the bracha of Shema Koleinu was already completed, the individual must return to the beginning of the bracha of Bareich Aleinu and use the proper phrase of v?sain tal umatar. What if a person does not remember if he said v?sain bracha or v?sain tal umatar? Since he has no recollection, we assume the bracha was recited without thought, out of habit, in the manner that he was accustomed to saying it. Halacha assumes that habits of davening are established with thirty days of repetition. As such, up until thirty days from December 5th, it can be assumed that the wrong phrase (v?sain bracha) was used, and Shmoneh Esrei must be repeated. After thirty days have elapsed, when in doubt, Shmoneh Esrei need not be repeated. It can be assumed that v?sain tal umatar was said out of habit and second nature. The Mishna Berura (114:38) qualifies this last halacha and says that if the person intended to say ?v?sain tal umatar? in Shmoneh Esrei, and later in the day he cannot remember what he said, he need not repeat Shmoneh Esrei. This is because it can be assumed that he recited the bracha properly, since that was his intent. The fact that he cannot remember is inconsequential because people do not typically remember such details after a significant amount of time has passed. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt?l (Shmiras Shabbos Kehilchoso 57:17) notes that each person?s memory span is different. For someone whose memory is poor, the last halacha would apply even if one cannot remember soon after reciting Shemoneh Esrei. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sholom at aishdas.org Mon Dec 7 07:13:25 2020 From: sholom at aishdas.org (Sholom Simon) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:13:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question Message-ID: Daf yomi has entered the famous "Sugya of R Chanina S'gan HaKohamim". (Tangent: I've been told it's famous for it's difficulty, although in my limited learning, I'd never heard of it before). Indeed, it seems to be it'd be pretty hard to understand without an artscroll or a maggid shiur helping one along (I have both). In any event, over shabbos I was discussing the broad issues of the sugya with my wife -- namely, that we're talking about whether, on eruv Pesach, one can burn terumah chometz with tamei chometz. She asked (my limited understanding is that the stereotype for women vis-a-vis learning is that they tend to ask very practical questions -- if so, this fits the stereotype to a "T"): why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for Pesach? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to kohanim? (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain yet -- but that didn't sound right. Should Yankel be burning designated terumah? But that's a tangent). So -- thoughts, anyone? Is this case (on a practical level) speaking only of a kohain that has terumah chometz lying around the house right before Pesach? (Yes, I realize, and thus goes without saying, that on a theoretical level this raises a gazillion interesting issues from which we learn all kinds of things -- but I'm just focusing on the metzius here). -- Sholom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:45:21 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2020 06:45:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? Message-ID: . R' Marty Bluke asked: > Why are we so sure that this Halacha even applies today? This > seems to be a societal thing, in the time of Chazal it was > considered disrespectful to eat outside. However, chazals eating > habits were very different than ours. We no longer eat reclining > and we no longer follow many of the other minhagei seuda of > chazal. So if today it?s considered acceptable by society to eat > outside then chazals dictate should not apply. I have wondered the same thing. One could make a whole list of topics, some of which are dependent on the local society, and others are categorical for all times and places, leaving over a third category where Chazal were unclear about the issue. This very week on Avodah, we discussed whether "mpnei machlokes" situations are universal or not. Every so often, we discuss whether the importance of eating meat on Yom Tov depends on personal preferences. Rav Soloveitchik famously held that certain chazakos "rest not upon transient psychological behavioral patterns, but upon permanent ontological principles rooted in the very depth of the human personality." We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and therefore might change when eating habits changed. But my current understanding is that it results from technicalities about Chazal's requirement that one say a bracha acharona in the same place as he ate, so leaving that place complicates the bracha rishona as well. > For example, chazal state that a person should put on some kind > of belt for davening. This is the reason chasidim wear a gartel. > And yet, the non Hasidic world has abandoned this practice > because our mode of dress has changed and this is no longer > considered a respectful form of dress. If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at Orach Chayim 91:2) Among my pet peeves is people who think that there is a halacha, in all times and places, that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening, and so they wear the same dirty windbreaker or parka as when they are doing other activities. Rather, one must dress for davening in an honorable way, and this *is* dependent on local fashion, so while a suit or sport jacket might be the best in many circles, a plain clean shirt is preferable to covering that shirt with a shmatta. Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 10:30:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:30:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple Message-ID: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> I am reviving a thread from Dec 2003, started by RSM at . The news carried more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's position ended up discussed on Areivim. See the coverage of this subject line at https://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=S#SHAPE%20OF%20THE%20MENORAH%20OF%20THE%20TEMPLE and the previous topic (which is just "Shape of the Menorah"). So, here's the latest news https://www.timesofisrael.com/rare-second-temple-menorah-drawing-from-biblical-maccabean-site-brought-to-light/ The Times of Israel Archaeology / The sword ceased from Israel, but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas Rare Second Temple menorah drawing from biblical Maccabean site brought to light Amanda Borschel-Dan | 8 December 2020, 2:05 am Hitherto unpublished 2,000-year-old engraved menorah, forgotten in archives for 40 years, shores up hypothesis that ancient Michmas was a priestly settlement, study says Just ahead of Hanukkah, a forgotten 2,000-year-old engraved drawing of the Temple menorah is again seeing the light of day. First uncovered 40 years ago during archaeological surveys at Michmas, ... Michmas, today the Arab village Kfar Mukhmas, about 3 kilometers (1.8 miles) from the modern Jewish settlement of Maaleh Michmas and 9 kilometers (5.5 miles) from Jerusalem, is cited in the Book of Maccabees as the first base for the Jewish leader and future high priest, Jonathan. It is also identified in Mishnah Menahot 8:1 as the provider of the Temple's semolina wheat. Ancient Michmas is most known from the Book of Maccabees. As depicted in 1 Maccabees 9:73, Jonathan, the youngest of the five sons of revolt-instigating priest Mattathias, makes peace with the Seleucid general Bacchides and settles in Michmas ahead of beginning his rule, which spanned 161-143 BCE. "Thus the sword ceased from Israel: but Jonathan dwelt at Michmas, and began to govern the people; and he destroyed the ungodly men out of Israel." (King James Bible) ... As part of the new study, Raviv published for the first time the rare engraving of the menorah -- a symbol of priesthood during the Second Temple period -- that was discovered in a burial cave in the 1980s and forgotten.... According to the 1980s report, the menorah is approximately 50 centimeters (20 inches) wide and 30 centimeters (12 inches) high with a flat base of some 10 centimeters (4 inches). It has a total of seven branches, with six branches coming out of a central stem. Raviv writes that the menorah was crowned by an intriguing but unclear paleo-Hebrew letter, which was scratched into the cave wall. Rather large, the letter is 40 centimeters (15.5 inches) high and 20 centimeters (almost 8 inches) wide, and could be proof of a further priestly tie, said Raviv. ... Two additional charcoal menorahs at Michmas This newly rediscovered menorah and mysterious letter join another 1980s find of a hideaway cave, in the nearby el-'Aliliyat region. There, archaeologists discovered a mikveh (ritual bath), a cistern, and two menorahs drawn with a charcoaled stick, one crowned by an Aramaic/Hebrew inscription. ... The three Michmas menorah drawings are all likely dated to a period from circa 150 BCE to 136 CE and join only a handful of other seven-branched menorah representations from the Second Temple period. ... "Due to the difficulty in determining the exact date of the [Michmas] menorah's graffito and the scarcity of explicit references to priests in Michmas during the Second Temple period, it is possible that a group reached the site only after the destruction of the Temple and lived there during the period between the revolts," said Raviv in the press release. So, at some point or points in time between Yonasan haMakabi and Bar Kokhva, Jews (and likely kohanim, see text) were pretty convinced the menorah's arms were curved. That said, let me reiterate... The dinim of making a menorah don't seem to include the arms needing to be straight or curved. Assuming one can figure out a way to hammer 24 kt gold arms into straight lines that don't end up drooping under their own weight (eg having them narrow as they get further from the base), the menorah could have been either. So I see nothing ruling out Moshe's or Shelomo's menoros, or even the menoros of most of the history of Bayis Sheini being straight. It's not like we used the same menorah that Moshe made 1,300 years later. Barring unmentioned nissim, there were multiple menoros that were replaced. Did they all have exactly the same look? But the people who were there at the end of Bayis Sheini seem to have been convinced that the menorah of their day had curved arms. 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 JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 8 19:57:23 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 03:57:23 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Of course, I might be wrong. Maybe there IS a halacha that one's shirt needs to be covered for davening in all times and places. Let me know what you find. ---------------------------------- Imho this is a process which plays out historically without a clear algorithm. Only through the eyes of retrospection (e.g. the aruch hashulchan) is the result koshered (see hilchot aveilut as an example) KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Dec 9 11:38:51 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 14:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> On 9/12/20 1:30 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > The news carried > more data points attesting to the curviture of the arms of the menorah > in the Chashmonaim's and Herod's version of the BHMQ. Not the Chashmonaim's original version, which was made of iron spears and therefore presumably the arms were straight. But later, when it was replaced with a golden one. > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > position ended up discussed on Areivim. *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. 1. (in the short IE printed in chumashim) that the arms were like reeds, being round in *cross-section* and hollow; that would seem to imply that they were also straight like a reed, but he doesn't say so, and maybe in that aspect they were not like reeds. 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with straight arms and with curved ones. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 14:18:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 17:18:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine Message-ID: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> >From Snopes Do Remains Found on Mt. Kilimanjaro Parallel a Biblical Story? Claim Remains discovered on Mount Kilimanjaro provide evidence to support the story of Joseph, a well-known Bible passage about a drought in what is now Egypt nearly 4,000 years ago. Rating Mostly False But what they find "mostly false is not the bit that the drought happened. Just the bits over-eager Xian sites emballished it with. (This framing is typical of Snopes' bias. I think their content is accurate, but they present it in ways that show bias. Like focusing on "remains" so that they can use the word "false" in the ratings. "Mostly true" and "partially true" are also subjective calls in which their bias peeks through.) Anyway, here is the bit that made this an Avodah post: What's True Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Education is not the filling of a bucket, http://www.aishdas.org/asp but the lighting of a fire. Author: Widen Your Tent - W.B. Yeats - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 9 16:39:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 19:39:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> Message-ID: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 02:38:51PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > > Which RET and I revived for similar reasons in 2008 & 2009, respectively, > > reports came from other excavations, and again in 2010 because the IE's > > position ended up discussed on Areivim. > > *Not* the IE's position. He makes two statements about the menorah's > structure, neither of which is about the shape of the arms. We did indeed discuss the IE's position. You're just repeating your side of the discussion. Not sure why you're denying a position no one asserted here in the past decade. > 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were > not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but > rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the > seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with > straight arms and with curved ones. No need to site the picture. Shemos 25:37: And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding the arms were straight. It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the menorah. I don't know the connection between the IE and the illustrator. Unlike the Rambam, where we know the straight arms in the picture go back to his use of a straight-edge. And the most one can argue is that he simply didn't bother constructing parabolic arms in a schematic diagram of the gevi'im, kaftorim ufrachim. As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, arukhim, chalalim. You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's presuming your conclusion. OTOH, the half-circle arrangement in the long peirush is "chatzi agul". Picturing a full quadrant, curved arms in a half-circle, would explain the IE's use of agul in a consistent way. Or not. I took away from that conversation that the IE could be read either way, and therefore can't be used in a discussion of the shape of the arms of the menorah altogether. (I also noted then that while 24 kt gold is both heavy and softer than many other metals, and my metalurgist uncle did the math and found that straight arms would droop, the arms being hollow would avoid that problem. Unfortunately, 10 years later, my uncle is no longer in any shape to field any more such questions. Al taazveinu le'eis ziqnah...) But this thread was originally about something much more haskalishe... EVERY depiction of the menorah by people who could have seen it, or could have met people who saw it, shows curved arms. And another example was recently published, the third coming out of what looks like it was a city of kohanim. We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Rescue me from the desire to win every http://www.aishdas.org/asp argument and to always be right. Author: Widen Your Tent - Rav Nassan of Breslav - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF Likutei Tefilos 94:964 From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:47:18 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:47:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Evidence of Yoseif's Famine In-Reply-To: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> References: <20201209221803.GF18610@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 5:18 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Ohio State University researchers analyzed ice core samples retrieved > from ice fields located atop Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania. The > findings suggested that three "catastrophic droughts" took place over > the fields' 11,700-year history, one of which coincided with the > biblical story of Joseph 3,600 years ago. Except that that drought lasted 300 years, not the two years that Yosef's drought did. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 22:41:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 01:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The shape of the Menorah of the Temple In-Reply-To: <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> References: <20201209183008.GA28017@aishdas.org> <64a29ead-f914-f9d8-6731-99f6b87d638f@sero.name> <20201210003935.GA26174@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 9/12/20 7:39 pm, Micha Berger wrote: >> 2. (in the long IE that's published as a separate book) that the arms were >> not arranged in a flat vertical plane, as everyone else seems to think, but >> rather the six arms were arranged in a semi-circle behind and around the >> seventh one, like half of a chandelier. This is equally consistent with >> straight arms and with curved ones. > No need to site the picture. What picture? > Shemos 25:37: > And the qadmonim said: For one neir was in the middle, and the six > arranged one after the other in half-circle "chatzi agul". > > Saying the half-circle is on the horizontal plane, rather than the shapes > of the arms, is the only way to salvage the possibility of the IE holding > the arms were straight. It is not a "way to salvage" anything. It is the plain meaning of his words. I resent the accusation that I read it looking for a "way to salvage" anything. > It could also be read as describing your standard curved-arm image of the > menorah. No, it cannot. He plainly says the *lamps* were arranged in a half-circle, not the arms. The conventional picture everyone has of the menorah (*regardless* of the shape of the arms) has the lamps all in a line. And the reason he gives is that the six arms should be illuminating the middle one, which doesn't work if they're all in a line. That's why they're ranged behind it, radiating from it and illuminating it. Otherwise his linking this to the pasuk "El Ever Paneha" doesn't seem to make much sense. As for the shape of the arms he simply doesn't comment. > As can the short IE's comment (v. 32) be read both ways. He says: agulim, > arukhim, chalalim. > > You assert that the IE means agul in cross-section. I think that's > presuming your conclusion. No, it is not. It is simply reading the words. His *whole point* is that they are like reeds. And reeds are round in cross section, not in length. They're pipes. Now that implies they were straight, and that's very likely what he means by "aruchim", but I agree it's *possible* that he isn't talking about the lengthwise shape, and that in that aspect they weren't like reeds after all. > We may be forced to concude that whatever rishonim may have thought > about the appearance of the menorah in the Mishkan, in the latter part > of Bayis Sheini they were using a menorah with curved ones. Indeed, that conclusion seems inescapable. I don't recall ever having argued against it. I think it likely that the LR was unaware of the archaeological evidence, especially since most of it was discovered relatively recently. His entire point in that sicha was to reject using Titus's arch as a source; assuming as he did that that is the major or only source for the rounded arms, he felt that giving it credence and basing our depictions on it is morally wrong. But it seems to me from reading the text that he would have had no objections to a depiction of curved arms that was derived from kosher sources and owes nothing to that treife source. He might not have agreed that such depictions are accurate, preferring to stick with the rishonim, but his objection wasn't based on the inaccuracy but on the source for it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 9 23:00:48 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 02:00:48 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] simple daf yomi question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b202399-464e-f8a0-a432-6ccb486f3d03@sero.name> On 7/12/20 10:13 am, Sholom Simon via Avodah wrote: > why *would* someone have terumah around that they need to burn for > Pesach?? Does this entire issue -- speaking practically -- only apply to > kohanim? I don't see why that would be at all surprising or awkward. Kohanim are not exactly uncommon, after all. And Rabbi Chanina himself was, of course, a Kohen. There would also be non-Kohanim who would have terumah in the house because they have a daughter married to a Kohen, so they keep their terumah to feed her and her family when they're visiting. Especially for Pesach, when we see from Pesachim ch. 8 that it was common for married women, or at least newly married women, to leave their husbands and go to their parents' home for the seder. > (Unless we're talking about a case where you're average Yankel > the farmer separated terumah but didn't give it over to his local kohain > yet -- but that didn't sound right.? Should Yankel be burning designated > terumah? If it's chometz, then yes! A better question would be why he would have terumah that is *chametz*. Normally he'd have raw wheat, which is presumed not to be chametz. But an answer is that there is one form of terumah that everyone would regularly has in their home, and that is usually chametz. That is Challah. Challah is a kind of terumah, everyone has it from when they bake bread until the Kohen comes to collect it, and it's almost guaranteed to be chametz. So on Erev Pesach you'd be likely to have the challah from the latest batch of bread you baked, and the Kohen has probably been too busy to come collect it. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From cantorwolberg at cox.net Thu Dec 10 09:29:03 2020 From: cantorwolberg at cox.net (cantorwolberg) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 12:29:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha Message-ID: There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of the text in Shabbos 23a). Surely this is exceptional. If, due to circumstances beyond one's control, one doesn't eat matzoh on Pesach, or take hold of a lulav on Sukkos, or a hear a shofar on Rosh Hashanah, one is absolved of these obligations. If the mitzvah of Chanukah lights were solely to kindle them, then the inability to do so would similarly terminate the issue. However, such is not the case. It seems that beyond the actual kindling of lights, quintessentially, Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner. This is so timely for what we are experiencing. If we see this pandemic as a death sentence, then we are falling into a trap of utter hopelessness. However, it takes the Jew to see it in a special light as a challenge to life and to apprehend reality in a positive ?LIGHT." From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 11 05:16:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:16:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: Please see https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Vayeishev%205781%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=32856667&spUserID=MjM3MTAxNzY3NzIS1&spJobID=1843505080&spReportId=MTg0MzUwNTA4MAS2 for an article by the OU regarding this topic. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sat Dec 12 17:35:25 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 01:35:25 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Bitachon Message-ID: What is the relationship between bitachon, hishtadlus, and emunah? Rav Shimon Schwab in his lecture titled Bitachon deals with this. You can read the entire lecture at https://web.stevens.edu/golem/llevine/rsrh/bitachon.pdf The following is a small selection from this talk: The Will of G-d is that a Jew should go to work and earn a parnassah, and go to a doctor when he is sick, like every other person on earth. What, then, makes the baal bitachon different? He believes-he knows with certainty-that every penny he earns, and every cure he receives-indeed, every success he enjoys or failure he endures--comes directly from Hashem. It may come about through an earthly agent like a doctor, but its source is Hakadosh Baruch Hu. It is He who grants the physician the skill and ability to heal others; it is He who ensures that a business venture will be profitable or disastrous. One who looks beneath the surface and realizes this is the true baal bitachon. There is no conflict, then, between the concepts of bitachon and hishtadlus. On the contrary, we must display a combination of the two. When we earn a living, we must do all we can in an honest way to support our families, but we must always recognize that Hashem is the source of our well-being. And when we fly in an airplane, we should believe b'emunah sheleimah that the pilot and the air controllers gain their skills from the Ribono Shel Olom. Furthermore, the plane is held together through the mercy of Hakadosh Baruch Hu alone. If one maintains and displays this attitude, one can effect a great kiddush Hashem. Bitachon, then, is a major component of kedus"hah; but there is also something else: emunah. The Rambam wrote an entire sefer on it, and at the beginning he states that there can be no bitachon without emunah. However, it is very often possible for a person to have emunah without having bitachon. How is this so, and what is the difference between the two ideas? See the above link to the pdf file for the entire essay. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 14 03:41:22 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important Message-ID: What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the military victories of the Hashomayim? Since the military victories are mentioned in Al Hanissim and there is no mention of the oil, it seems that the military victories were considered more important. YL From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 05:40:56 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:40:56 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Can One Use Candles and Oil in the Same Menorah at the Same Time? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. I realize that I am almost out of olive oil and I don?t have time to go shopping. Is it better to light one candle with olive oil, and the remainder with wax, or it is better to use wax for all the candles? A. The Mishnah Berurah (673:2) writes that all the candles must be made from the same material. If the first candle is oil, the second one must be oil as well. If oil is not available, all candles should be wax. If the candles are dissimilar, it will appear as though half the candles were lit by one person and the others by someone else. The Mitzvah of Mehadrin min Ha?Mehadrin (lighting the amount of candles that correspond to the day) will not have been fulfilled. However, each person in the family can light a different type of candle. One can light all wax, and one can light all oil. The Beir Heitev (673:1) cites a disagreement as to whether one may use olive oil for one candle and other types of oil for the rest. Some view even a change in oil as a perceptible difference that would give the appearance that there are multiple people lighting. However, other poskim do not differentiate between types of oil. They even advocate using olive oil for the first candle and using less expensive oils for the rest if it is too expensive to purchase olive for all the candles. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 14 13:57:29 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:57:29 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] More on What is Considered More Important - the Oil of the Military Victories Message-ID: Rabbi Dr. Ari Zivotofsky sent me a link to an article he wrote dealing with this topic. It may be read at https://mizrachi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/HaMizrachi_Chanukkah_Israel_2020_48.pdf YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 16:01:04 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:01:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] What is to be considered more important In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215000104.GD24460@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 06:41:22AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > What is to be considered more important regarding Chanukah - the small flask > with only enough oil to burn for none day that burned for 8 days or the > military victories of the Hashomayim? I theorized that it depends when. The first Chanukah, according to Seifer haMakabiim, was simply satisfying the need for aliyas haregel, and had echoes of Sukkos. Still present in Beis Shammai, who pattern the number of lights lit each night after the parim of the Mussaf of Sukkos -- one less each day. When they established the holiday, it was about the rededication of the BHMQ and restoration of autonomy in Judea. Not about the military victories, but the aftermath. Chanukah isn't on the date we won. (For that matter, neither is Purim; it's the day after.) See the Meshekh Chokhmah on Shemos 12:16 "uveyom". Also, not about the oil. Think about it -- how many people could have witnessed the neis? Even if they took the menorah out for a public lighting, who was watching them the whole time to know they weren't refilled on the sly? (The phrase "hidliqu neiros bechatzros qodshekha" could mean a lot of things. Including the possibility that they lit the menorah in the Azarah, and then put it in place -- hanakhah oseh mitzvah. Or maybe that they lit lamps in the courtyard, like a Simchas Beis haSho'eivah.) But then was Churban Bayis and then the Hadrianic Persecutions. Everything Chanukah was about was gone. OTOH, you couldn't eliminate Chanukah when the rest of Megillas Taanis was retired, because it has a mitzvah enacted by the Sanhedrin in the Lishkas haGazis -- there was no one authorized to repeal it. I suggested that this was what Chazal mean when the gemara asks "Mai Chanukah?" What is Chanukah to us, today? And so they took out the neis shemen and gave it new emphasis. Celebrating light amid darkness, and the small signs that Hashem is still with us, fits the tenor of the question. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -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 Mon Dec 14 15:23:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:23:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Unusual Halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214232354.GB24460@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 12:29:03PM -0500, cantorwolberg via Avodah wrote: > There is an unusual law in the observance of Chanukah which is unique > among mitzvos. The Shulchan Aruch rules that one who doesn't have the > opportunity to kindle Chanukah lights or to have someone lighting on > his behalf in his home becomes obligated, upon merely seeing Chanukah > lights anywhere, to recite the blessing "She'asah Nissim," "Who performed > miracles" (Or ch.676.-3, in accordance with Rashi's interpretation of > the text in Shabbos 23a). I think it's because the mitzvah isn't about the lighting of the menorah, but about pirsumei nissa. Therefore, while there is a mitzvah to light the menorah, one can accomlish a major aspect of the mitzvah by witnessing the fact that someone else did, and then acknowledging the neis. And notice you don't actually say the berakhah "asher qidishanu bemitzvosav". You say the one acknowledging the neis. Simiilarly, there is a huge debate -- too many sources for me to keep track of -- whether one says "She'asah Nissim" when seeing a menorah when someone else is lighting for you back at home, but you're not there to see it. The MB (676:6) tells you not to, because safeiq berakhos lehaqeil. (Meaning, he gave up and couldn't definitively pick a side.) The other mitzvos you mention -- matzah, lulav or shofar -- aren't about spreading news. And they don't have a parallel 2nd berakhah. I know, it's not as poetic as your derashah: > Chanukah imposes an obligation upon Jews to see things in a special > light, to apprehend reality in a unique manner.... But it's the given reason. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha -- Micha Berger "As long as the candle is still burning, http://www.aishdas.org/asp it is still possible to accomplish and to Author: Widen Your Tent mend." - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Anonymous shoemaker to R' Yisrael Salanter From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 15:38:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 18:38:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201214233839.GC24460@aishdas.org> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 01:16:50PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Please see > https://oukosher.org/content/uploads/2020/12/Daf-Hakashrus-Chanukah-2020.pdf > for an article by the OU regarding this topic. The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even mesayeia, etc... -Micha PS: There is chalav hacompanies Fair Trade chocolate coins. But I didn't find pareve or CY. From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:12:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Special Places In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215001203.GE24460@aishdas.org> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 09:12:32PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > If I disagree with the idea that something can be inherently qadosh, then > what about things that are inherently large, or inherently blue, or > inherently sweet? ... See the MC. Yeah, he sees them as different. Qedushah isn't a property of an object without a relationship to a human. Maybe you can say an object isn't inherently blue without a human eye with our eyes and perception mechanisms. A single frequency of photon or various combinations of light frequencies can all create the same experience of blue. Maybe you can make a mashal for the MC's take on qedushah with that. [Email #2. -micha] On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 08:15:27AM +0000, Ben Bradley via Avodah wrote: > How does the MC's clal apply to kedusha of of time and of person? I > presume it would need to apply there unless you posit that kedusha has > a completely different meaning in those contexts. > But kedushas Shabbos seems very clearly independant of human input.... Qedushah of person is the one qedushah he *does* allow. People bring qedushah into the world. Yeah, I don't know what the MC says / would say about Shabbos. Also would like to find his treatment of qedushas Yisrael. Can anyone help? A lichtikn un freilechn Chanukah! -Micha From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 14 16:30:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 19:30:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201215003035.GA13801@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:39:46AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah"(from > where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers > with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this > question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Me neither. But if you want to include Yerushalmi, it's easy. But from R Chisda, in Bavel, and included in the Bavli... Strange. An enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 14 23:34:51 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 07:34:51 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Existing practice driving halacha In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to change or institute a practice. Only when a practice is becomes widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in question has obligatory force as a minhag. A conscious decision to implement a practice would remove that force. There is of course much to add about the dynamics of this, after all this is R Hutner, see the essay for details. But I thought the above would add to previous discussions. Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:51:20 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2020 23:51:20 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 Message-ID: I thought that olam might appreciate this article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I thought it was great, eye-opening and thought provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.) KT and AFC, MYG P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 06:29:38 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:29:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight Message-ID: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From http://mrlitvak.blogspot.com/2020/12/neo-chasidus-guitar-hallel-in-spotlight.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+MrLitvak+%28Mr.+Litvak%29 A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel blog, related to this. According to it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to a ???? ????? about it. The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be avoided. See the above URL for more. Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some davening. See Reb Shlomo Carlebach's last Hoshana Rabbah https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/9k28yp/reb_shlomo_carlebachs_last_hoshana_rabbah/ IMO no one has come close to Reb Shlomo when it comes to Jewish music. Interestingly enough, his early background was pure Yekkish. YL. From larry62341 at optonline.net Wed Dec 16 03:23:55 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 06:23:55 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH on Chanukah - from the JO in 1964 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 11:51 PM 12/15/2020, Moshe Y. Gluck wrote: >I thought that olam might appreciate this >article from RSRH on Chanukah, that the Jewish >Observer published (in translation) in 1964. I >thought it was great, eye-opening and thought >provoking, and we shared it to the Agudah's >email list today. If you'd like to read it, click here: > >https://files.constantcontact.com/1cf6ab87001/99d70f59-294a-4fbc-bda4-449957e91cdf.pdf (Shameless Agudah promotion - if you want to sign up for Agudah emails, go to? https://agudah.org/daily-updates/.)? >MYG > >P.S. I cc'ed R' YL, I know he's a fan of anything from RSRH! Thank you. This essay is the first essay in the Collected Writings of RSRH Volume II dealing with Kislev. There are 5 other essays in the section dealing with Kislev, and they are all well worth reading. You plugged the Agudah, so I will plug the Collected Writings of RSRH available from Feldheim. See https://www.feldheim.com/collected-writings-of-rabbi-samson-raphael-hirsch.html Note that the entire set is available now at the reduced price of $159.99, a savings of $40. I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch. IIRC, "Mr." Shraga Feivel Mendlowitz of Torah Vodaath fame maintained the same thing! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 16 11:59:40 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 14:59:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > A short time ago, I noticed a post at the Life in Israel > blog, related to this. According to > it, a dispute erupted after someone came into a minyan with a violin and > started playing it during Hallel. Later on, they agreed to ask a ???? to > a ???? ????? about it.? The question was posed to Rav Shlomo Aviner, a > leading Dati-Leumi Rabbi, and he said that it should be > avoided. As the blogger notes, there is something very odd about the story as reported, and it's very likely not true. It may be based on a true story, but without knowing the true details one cannot draw any conclusions. Legufo shel inyan, as I understand it one of the takanos made against the Reformers, along with such things as requiring at least one row of seats forward of the bimah, was to ban organ music in shul. I think some rabbonim now have no idea what an organ is, or what it signifies in European culture, and have mistakenly extended this to all instruments. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 16 09:03:08 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:03:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Neo-Chasidus Guitar Hallel in the Spotlight In-Reply-To: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <04.4E.00463.3E91ADF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <20201216170308.GB12403@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:29:38AM -0500, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > Reb Shlomo Carlebach pioneered playing musical instruments during some > davening... Except, of course, for the Leviim. The objections really only began when Reform started bringing instruments into their Temples for chukas hagoyim reasons. Originally, they were still shomerei Shabbos, and they hired non-Jews to play. (Amira le'aku"m letzorekh mitzvah...) Have a Great Teiveis, and a enlightening and enjoyable Chanukah! -Micha From zvilampel at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 14:46:54 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 17:46:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Meanings of a Verse Are Unique to That Verse Message-ID: There is a principle the Gemora phrases as, ??mashma-os dorshin.?? This means that a number of sages may be in agreement over what the halacha is, and only disagree over what the Torah?s indication for that halacha is. The Rambam apparently has this principle in mind when he emphasizes that there is really no disagreement with many basic payrushim mekubalim miSinai, (such as that the ??pri eitz hadar?? refers to the esrog), and the only disagreement is over how the written Torah indicates it. It might be inferred that the Torah indicated the halacha in more than one way. There is another principle, though, of ??ein taam echad yotsei mi-kammah mikra-os,?? a halacha is not indicated by more than one posuk. (This principle is understood broadly, and further applied, in Sanhedrin 34a, regarding counting the votes taken by a Beis Din. If two dayanim give an identical reason for their decision, it counts as one argument?we are weighing reasons, not counting people who hold them--even if each one?s source for that reason is a different verse!) This would seem to contradict the former principal, but Rashi?s comment on the latter principle shows that he disagrees with the above inference: ??[When two judges both give the same reason for their decision] we only count them as one reason to support that verdict.???Rashi: Because one of these verses do not come for this purpose, because we stand by the principle that no two verses come to teach the same concept. [And] therefore, one of them [judges] is in error [over the true meaning of the verse]. Although each verse contains many meanings, those meanings are unique and exclusive to that verse. If there is a disagreement over which verse is meant to convey a particular meaning, one of the suggestions (at least) must be wrong?i.e. not the meaning Hashem intended by that verse. This also sheds light on how Rashi does not take the meaning of ''Eilu V'eilu.'' Zv Lampel ???? ??????? ?? ?? ???? ? m?? ???: ??? ????? ??????? ?????? ??????, ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ?????, ??????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????. ????? ???? ???????? - ???? ??? ???? ??????, ???? ????? ???? ???. ??? ???? ?????? - ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ??????? ???? - ??, ??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??????. ????? ????? ??? ??? ???? ?????: ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????? ???! - ??? ???: ??? ????? ??? ??? ???. ????? ????? - ??? ????: ???? ???: ??? ??? ????? ???? ?? ????? ?? ?? ?????? - ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????, ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ??????. ??? ??? ?????? ???: ?????? ???? ???, ?? ???? ?? ????? ???? ??????? - ?? ???? ??? ???? ???? ?????. ??"? ??? ????? ??? ??? ??? - ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ???, ?????? ?? ?? ????? ??? ?????? ???? ??? - ???? ?? ??????? ???? ???. This also provides light on Rashi?s understanding of Eilu V?Eilu. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Fri Dec 18 10:17:03 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 13:17:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus Message-ID: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> From https://together.ou.org/page/guidance?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=shsh%20Miketz%205781%20%281%29&utm_content= Guidance Regarding COVID-19 Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter ?????? and Harav Mordechai Willig ??????, with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ??????. together.ou.org There has long been an almost uniform consensus among leading medical experts that vaccines are an effective and responsible manner of protecting life and advancing health. For over two hundred years vaccinations have been responsible for the dramatic reduction of many terrible diseases and have significantly improved public health in our country and around the world. For this reason, the consensus of our major poskim (halachic decisors) is to encourage us to use vaccinations to protect ourselves and others from disease. While this guidance of our poskim has addressed vaccine usage generally, the introduction of the novel COVID-19 vaccines required specific reconsideration. The poskim recognize that the COVID-19 vaccines have been developed with unprecedented speed and are expected to be made available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). In addition, the two currently leading COVID-19 vaccine candidates are mRNA vaccines which employ a new vaccine technology. Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. See the above URL for more. YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:44:54 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> In a couple of hours is my daughter's yahrzeit. So, I thought it would be an appropriate day to sponsor RYGB's AhS Yomi shiur. I wrote or intended to write him that the donation was lezeikher nishmas. Lemaaseh on the dedication RYGB wrote le'ilui nishmas. I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the concept of cheit to have meaning. Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise back up to? Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) :-)BBii! -Micha -- Micha Berger You are not a human being in search http://www.aishdas.org/asp of a spiritual experience. You are a Author: Widen Your Tent spiritual being immersed in a human - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF experience. - Pierre Teilhard de Chardin From JRich at Segalco.com Sun Dec 20 00:41:09 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:09 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: > Of course, if you assume every crib death is a gilgul who had other lives, > the question has an answer. But what if one doesn't believe that? (What > would R Saadia Ga'on say? ) ... > -Micha When asked, I've said that maybe that baby's tafkid was simply to influence others and to the extent that influence continues, the neshama intrinsically has an aliyah KT Joel Rich From jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com Sun Dec 20 05:02:46 2020 From: jkaplan at tenzerlunin.com (Joseph Kaplan) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 13:02:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> RYL reiterates (38/208): ? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.? You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? Joseph Sent from my iPhone From larry62341 at optonline.net Sun Dec 20 05:26:11 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:26:11 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH In-Reply-To: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> References: <5F7CBB49-53CA-4C4F-8E84-EC2F9108CA21@tenzerlunin.com> Message-ID: <99.2F.01309.1015FDF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >RYL reiterates (38/208): > >??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? > >You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? You left out the part where I said that R.. Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs the ability to comprehend the entire body of Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews cannot do this and never did or will do this.. RSRH does this for us in his writings. An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. If one does not know why Judaism is not a religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 06:38:07 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 09:38:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Chocolate Production Message-ID: . R' Micha Berger wrote: > The OU does not raise questions of child slavery and the > cruelty routinely imposed on the slaves who pick our chocolate. If I understand correctly, that's because those questions are not their field of expertise. They don't support slavery, chalila, but the enforcement of such issues are better left to the government and/or "fair trade" organizations. That approach is very reasonable to me. This paragraph wouldn't justify a post to Avodah, but it does segue into RMB's second comment: > And whether it's mutar to support the industry, if our trade > is so small as to have no measurable effect so it isn't even > mesayeia, etc... Is it really that small? Hashgachos routinely advertise that shomrei mitzvos constitute only a fraction of the consumers who look for a hechsher when shopping. Manufacturers pay lots of money to get a hechsher on their label, and for good reason. The policies set by the hashgachos may be more powerful than we realize. Perhaps mesayeia *IS* (or should be) a relevant factor. For example, for those who don't remember the incident 18 years ago, read here about when Stella D'Oro cancelled their plans to switch from OU Pareve to OUD: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/nyregion/of-milk-and-cookies-or-how-orthodox-jews-saved-an-italian-recipe.html?auth=login-email&login=email Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mcohen at touchlogic.com Sun Dec 20 05:41:45 2020 From: mcohen at touchlogic.com (mcohen at touchlogic.com) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 08:41:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] on the obligation (or not) to vaccinate for covid Message-ID: <0f8401d6d6d5$dbdc8a10$93959e30$@touchlogic.com> https://www.jewishpress.com/blogs/felafel-on-rye/rabbi-avraham-steinberg-no- halachic-obligation-for-now-to-be-vaccinated-against-covid-19/2020/12/10/ From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 08:10:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 16:10:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: From https://vosizneias.com/2020/12/20/vizhnitz-rebbe-asks-chasidim-to-make-kiddush-this-shabbos-between-6-and-7/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+vin+%28Vos+Iz+Neias%29 [https://vosizneias.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Vizhnitzer-Rebbe.png] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 - Vos Iz Neias BNEI BRAK (VINnews) ? The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to [?] vosizneias.com The Vizhnitz Rebbe, Rabbi Yisrael Hager, presented an unusual request to his chasidim during a sermon he gave during the final Shabbos meal. It is the custom in many chasidic groups not to make Kiddush on Friday nights during the winter between 6 PM and 7 PM. Others try not to make Kiddush during the first hour of the night. The reason for this is that this is a time when Mars is the astrological sign controlling the world and this is not an auspicious time to be making Kiddush. The rebbe however requested that on the forthcoming Shabbos, Parshas Vayigash, people should not maintain this stringency and should make Kiddush between 6 and 7. The reason for this is that this coming Friday marks the fast of the Tenth of Teves, which is the only fast which can fall on a Friday and even this is a very unusual occurrence (the last time was in 2013). The rebbe was concerned that women and children will be fasting and tired after the Shabbos enters and will not be able to wait until 7 PM before they eat. The rebbe said that people should ?have mercy on their household and not maintain this stringency while the rest of the household is famished from the fast. See the above URL for more. I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. Can anyone explain this? YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jay at m5.chicago.il.us Sun Dec 20 09:12:59 2020 From: jay at m5.chicago.il.us (Jay F. Shachter) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 17:12:59 +0000 (WET) Subject: [Avodah] im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im In-Reply-To: from "avodah-request@lists.aishdas.org" at Dec 19, 2020 11:51:50 pm Message-ID: <16085059790.205ed.63997@lsd.chicago.il.us.chicago.il.us> > > There's a recurring discussion on the list about the mechanism for > existing Jewish practice being a source for ongoing psak halacha. In > view of which I thought it useful to share an essay by R Hutner in > Pachad Yitzchak on Chanuka, maamar 14. He posits that there are two > distinct drivers of the obligation to maintain any given takana - > the status of the beis din concerned and the extent to which Klal > Yisrael accepts and keeps the takana. Each works independently. > > However there's an important distinction in the mechanism by which > each works. The beis din's takana works through da'as, ie the > conscious decision to enact a practice. In contradistinction, > acceptance of any given practice by klal yisrael works specifically > without da'as, meaning that there has to be no conscious decision to > change or institute a practice. Only when a practice [] becomes > widespread without any conscious decision by the community do we > invoke 'im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim' to say the practice in > question has obligatory force as a minhag.... > I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, such as learning Mishnayyoth in a house of mourning (with the mourner present), or wearing your wedding ring outdoors on Shabbath, or allowing people who mispronounce the `ayin to recite the priestly blessing (an interesting halakhah, since there is no `ayin in the priestly blessing, but an undisputed halakha nevertheless). Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 20 07:45:50 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 15:45:50 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fear of G-d Leads to a Change of Heart Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab On Chumash: Bereshis 42:20-21 And bring your youngest brother to me, so that your words may be verified, and you will not die." And they did so. And they said to one another, "Indeed, we are guilty for our brother, that we witnessed the distress of his soul when he begged us, and we did not listen. That is why this trouble has come upon us." A G-d-fearing Jew needs to constantly examine his attitudes, positions, and deeds to determine whether they are in line with the truth of the Torah. One should never hold on to old policies, old behaviors, or even old traditions just because, "This is what we decided in the past," or, "This is the way we have always done it." The Rav was always re-examining his positions and hashkafos, to be certain that they were consistent with the emes. In February of 1990, the Rav delivered an address to his congregation. At that time, he admitted to having changed his mind regarding conclusions that he had arrived at as a young man, when he advocated the total severance from his "Torah im Derech Eretz" heritage. He openly declared that he had re-examined Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch's philosophy of Torah education, and now believed it to be not just an emergency measure, but as applicable today as it was in the years before the Holocaust. See TIDE - A Second View YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 20 16:42:21 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:42:21 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <097c0675-c58f-828e-fed8-c8f283e3cce1@sero.name> On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. The hourly rotation of the planets at the end of Masechta Shabbos is usually calculated using mean hours, so it is the same everywhere and throughout the year, before the modern adjustments. The planetary influence affects each place when that time comes to that place, just like all time-based influences, such as zmanei hayom, shabbos & yomtov, etc. What I don't understand is that in most places in the Northern Hemisphere, certainly in the USA and Eretz Yisrael, it should be possible to make kiddush *before* the hour of Mars starts, which is in any case the original minhag as recorded by the Maharil. The Maharil doesn't say to wait until after Mars's hour, he says davka to hurry up and make kiddush under the influence of Jupiter, rather than that of Mars. The emphasis is not on the negative but on the positive. In the case where one did not manage this, it's not even clear to me that the Maharil would have approved of waiting an hour; perhaps he would have said next time hurry up, but now that you missed it make kiddush anyway. But at any rate this week surely the Vizhnitzer Rebbe should have urged people to daven at the earliest zman and hurry home so as to make kiddush before "six o'clock" (which in EY is more like 5:40), instead of dawdling and getting home during that hour. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 16:29:18 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 19:29:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah Message-ID: > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? Kt Joel rich Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 17:48:08 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 20:48:08 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB wrote: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seinfeld at jsli.org Sun Dec 20 18:46:52 2020 From: seinfeld at jsli.org (Alexander Seinfeld) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 21:46:52 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] RSRH Message-ID: > > > >At 08:02 AM 12/20/2020, Joseph Kaplan wrote: >>RYL reiterates (38/208): >> >>??? I maintain that if one truly wants to understand >>Judaism, then one has to be familiar with the >>writings of Rabbiner Hirsch.??? >> >>You mean no one truly understood Judaism before the 19th century? >You left out the part where I said that R.. >Shraga Feivel Mendelovitz told a yeshiva bachur the same thing. > >To gain a true understanding of Yahadus one needs >the ability to comprehend the entire body of >Torah knowledge. The vast majority of Jews >cannot do this and never did or will do this.. >RSRH does this for us in his writings. > >An important point. Is Judaism a religion? RSRH >says it is not. Do you know why Yahadus is not a >religion? Rabbiner Hirsch explains why it is not. > >If one does not know why Judaism is not a >religion, then one most certainly does not truly understand Judaism. > >YL > Here?s another way of looking at it - Rav Hirsch explains Judaism _for a modern reader_ to understand in a way that no one else has done. There is nothing in Rav Hirsch that I?ve ever seen that is conceptually innovative, the innovation is his way of explaining both the big picture and the details. If looking for a place to begin, I would suggest either his Chumash commentary (the full one, not the abridged) or Horeb. > From cbkaufman at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 21:08:02 2020 From: cbkaufman at gmail.com (Brent Kaufman) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 23:08:02 -0600 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would tell you that R. Saadia Gaon would agree to the fact that baby still has a neshama that, like all neshamos, need a tikun or tikunim before they pass away before they go up to the level above its current, bodily, level. That's what every nisoyon that a person goes through creates - an ilui for their neshama. You don't have to come on to gilgul neshama to ask the question. Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of two things. Either he would say: *"Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it, that shouldn't be discussing these things. (Perhaps: "I was sworn not to reveal these teachings to my generation"). But when it was the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public, He did so by sending a neshama to the world 600 (or so) years after me, named R. Yitzchak ben Shlomo Luria. From that point onward these matters follow his teachings,..... notwithstanding a few daatei yechidim that pop up on occasion.``* Or he would say: *"Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect. Those teachings weren't clear in my generation. The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He did so by sending..."* b'Kavod to both of you, Chaimbaruch Kaufman > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crclbas at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 19:03:34 2020 From: crclbas at gmail.com (Ben Samson) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Brocho Message-ID: Does anyone know the special Brocho for Refuah that is found in the Shulchan Aruch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:29:59 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:29:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? mendel -- Mendel E. Singer, PhD MPH Associate Professor and Vice Chair for Education Director, MS Biostatistics Director, MS Biomedical and Health Informatics Dept. of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences Case School of Medicine 10900 Euclid Ave, WG-57 Cleveland, OH 44106 216-368-1951 Physical Address: WG-72B From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:08:46 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:08:46 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? ------------------------------------------------- Through a data search I found two more: Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel 39:15 Zvi Lampel ------------------------------ And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in such limited circumstances? KT Joel RIch THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 00:17:07 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:17:07 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://youtu.be/CvdRqMiPfL4 The shiur is great. Very clear. Strong. But I thought he was saying it was required to vaccinate, and I just hear Rav Willig say that he looked at the transcript and he doesn't go that far. I suppose it is possible it isn't the same shiur, but I doubt that. Anyone else catch this shiur? What were your impressions? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://links.responder.co.il/?lid=21176385&sid=68169599&k=b0045bac13ab4911d30d7249cd07ad5b ????? ?"? ???? ??? ??? ??? ???, ????? ?????? ?????? ??. ??? ??? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ?????? ??, ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??????? ?????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ???? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??, ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ???? ??????? ??? ??? ????? ????? ?????, ????"? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?????? ??? ????? ????? ???????. KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 05:32:11 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:32:11 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Asher Weiss, Shlita, on the COVID-19 Vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Yeshiva World Degel Hatorah MK Yitzchak Pindrus, arrived at Shaare Tzedek Hospital in Yerushalayim on Sunday, in order to take the COVID-19 vaccine, but prior to getting vaccinated, Pindrus spoke with Hagaon HaRav Chaim Kanievsky about the vaccine, and whether or not a person should take it. Pindrus asked HaRav Kanievsky whether it is 'permissible' to take the vaccine or whether a person is 'obligated; to take the vaccine? HaRav Chaim answered that it's a Chiyuv of "Hishtadlus" to take the vaccine, and not "an option". Pindrus then asked HaRav Chaim about the fear some people have regarding what unknown damage that it can cause in the future. To which Rav Chaim responded "tell them not to be afraid." THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is 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 bdbradley70 at hotmail.com Mon Dec 21 05:19:12 2020 From: bdbradley70 at hotmail.com (Ben Bradley) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:19:12 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Im lo nevi'im bnei nevi'im heim In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ''I do not know the sense in which you, or R' Hutner, intent to apply that quote. I do know that whenever I hear that quote, I never hear it used to justify practices that merely seem to have no basis in halakha; it is used only to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth.....Hillel, however, only used those words when he did not know the halakha; he never used those words when he knew the halakha. If you want to justify widespread practices that clearly violate undisputed halakhoth, gei gezinteheit, but I hope that you will not misapply Hillel's words when you do....'' I am glad to state with a clear conscience that I do not want to justify practices which violate halacha. I am quite certain I can speak for R' Hutner likewise. Having cleared that up, R' Hutner's context is discussing the gemara's foreknowledge of the permanent nature of Chanuka in the yemos hamoshiach given the possibility that a future, greater Beis Din could cancel it. His answer is that its acceptance by the whole nation makes it immutable. In that context Im lo nevi'im, bnei nevi'im heim means that acceptance by the whole nation gives obligatory force to a takana beyond that which depends on the stature of the Beis Din which issued it, and not at all as used by whoever you've been listening to. (I should add that he uses the phrase essentially in passing and his argument does not depend on it in the slightest) . I think that was clear in the original post and indicated by its original title 'Existing practice driving halacha'. Even clearer, I think, was that I was addressing recurrent threads on the list about the place of existing practice in detemining psak eg Mishna Brurah vs Aruch HaShulchan in many places, and in particular R Joel Rich's probing questions on the subject. I was not per se dealing with the meaning of the phrase you titled your response with. Please do refer to those threads for further context. And to R' Hutner in Pachad Yitzchak. Kol tuv Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:29:18 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:29:18 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad Message-ID: It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. The announcement is based on the standard calculation of the lunar months - 29 days, 12 hours, and ~44 minutes The time is based on Jerusalem Standard Time. Some Shuls adjust the announcement to Daylight Saving Time." >From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molad Molad - Wikipedia Molad (????, plural Moladot, ??????) is a Hebrew word meaning "birth" that also generically refers to the time at which the New Moon is "born". The word is ambiguous, however, because depending on the context it could refer to the actual or mean astronomical lunar conjunction (calculated by a specified method, for a specified time zone), or the molad of the traditional Hebrew ... en.wikipedia.org The molad emtza'i (???? ?????, average molad, used for the traditional Hebrew calendar)[1] is based on a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar conjunction. Each molad moment occurs exactly 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes and 3+1/3 seconds (or, equivalently, 29 days 12 hours and 44+1/18 minutes) after the previous molad moment.[2] This interval is numerically exactly the same as the length of the mean synodic month that was published by Ptolemy in the Almagest, who cited Hipparchus as its source. Although in the era of Hipparchus (2nd century BC) this interval was equal to the average time between lunar conjunctions, mean lunation intervals get progressively shorter due to tidal transfer of angular momentum from Earth to Moon, consequently in the present era the molad interval is about 3/5 of a second too long. The molad interval as an exact improper fraction = 29+12/24+44/1440+(10/3)/86400 = 765433/25920 days, where the denominator 25920 is the number of parts per day (each part equals 1/18 minute or 10/3 seconds) and one can alternatively write the numerator in the interesting descending sequence 765432+1. As a mixed fraction this reduces to 29+13753/25920 days, which implies an underlying fixed arithmetic lunar cycle of 25920 months in which 13753 months have 30 days and the remaining 25920 ? 13753 = 12167 months have 29 days, spread as smoothly as possible. In any such lunar cycle, which must have an integer number of days, 30-day months must occur slightly more frequently than 29-day months, such that 2 consecutive 30-day months occur at intervals of either 17 or 15 months, where the 17-month interval is approximately twice as common as the 15-month interval. This typical mean lunar cycle pattern becomes clearly evident if one computes the molad moment, adds 1/4 day to account for the molad zakein postponement rule, keeps only the integer part of the result to compute the molad day, calculates the difference from the previous molad day (will be either 30 days = "F" for full, or 29 days = "D" for deficient), and then lists the sequence with the insertion of one space in the middle of every FF pair and starting a new line at the end of every 15-month interval. As they say, "Live and learn." YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 08:47:19 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 16:47:19 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] =?windows-1252?q?_If_Asara_B=92Teives_would_fall_on_Satu?= =?windows-1252?q?rday=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham (a work authored by the 14th century Spanish posek, Rav David Avudraham,) that if Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos. (In practice, once the calendar was fixed by Hillel Ha'Sheini, Asara B?Teives cannot fall on Shabbos.) However, other public fasts days that fall on Shabbos are postponed to Sunday. Why is Asara B?Teives different than other fast days? A. The Avudraham writes that Asara B?Teiveis is not delayed because the pasuk in Yechezkel 24:2 states that the Babylonians laid siege on Yerushalayim ?b?etzem ha?yom ha?zeh? (In the midst of this day). This phrase indicates the significance of that particular date, and therefore the fast is never delayed. The same expression appears in the Torah when describing Yom Kippur (Vayikra 23:29), which also is never postponed. In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B?Teiveis is unique? Rav Chaim Brisker (Chidushei HaGrach ? Rosh Hashanah 18b) offers the following explanation: When necessary, a fast may take place on Shabbos. This can be demonstrated from the fact that a taanis chalom (a fast to annul a disturbing dream) is observed on Shabbos, because the fast is most effective the same day as the dream. If so, why are the fasts of Shiva Assar B?Tamuz and Tisha B?Av postponed when they fall on Shabbos? Rav Chaim responds that the Navi in Zecharia (8:19) refers to Shiva Assar B?Tamuz as the fast of the 4th month and Tisha B?Av as the fast of the 5th month (see Rosh Hashana 18b). Since the Navi identifies the fast days by the month and not the calendar date, it appears that Tamuz and Av were selected for fasting because they were periods of tragedy, and the specific dates were chosen only to establish uniformity. When the fasts fall on Shabbos, the fasts are delayed because the month remains the same, and the day of the month is of secondary importance. In contrast, regarding Asara B?Teives, since Yechezkal emphasized, ?in the midst of this day?, it is clear that the tenth of Teives is of special significance, and therefore the taanis is observed even on Shabbos, just as a taanis chalom is observed on Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 07:06:02 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 15:06:02 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gil.student at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 07:12:34 2020 From: gil.student at gmail.com (gil.student at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:12:34 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine wrote: > From Steven cooper, MD > > ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even > immune compromised > > And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the > ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 16:04:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:04:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Even More on the Molad Message-ID: I have received two emails dealing with this topic. IIANM, the announced molad time is not JST; it is Jerusalem local time, which I believe is 21 minutes later than standard time. _____________________________________________________________________ Solar time means calculating the time based on high noon. So midnight would be 12 hours after high noon. Solar time is a system of counting time it has nothing to do with whether the molad falls at night or during the day. See below from OU.org https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in accordance with Jerusalem time. To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times may be an hour apart. Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. When the molad is announced, it is the time of the molad in Jerusalem based on solar time. __________________________________________________ So according to the second email, my original statement that the Molad is announced in Jerusalem solar time was correct!!! YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 19:07:30 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 22:07:30 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: . Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. Comments? Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:47:01 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:47:01 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Molad In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <06bff9de-8ad3-64a1-517a-7b330c331b74@sero.name> On 21/12/20 4:29 pm, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > It has been pointed out to me that "The Molad announcement isn't based > on solar time, as there's no nighttime solar time. That's false. There certainly is solar time at night, and the molad is reported in that system. > a constant interval cycle that is widely but incorrectly regarded as > an approximation of the time in Jerusalem of the mean lunar > conjunction. "Incorrectly"?! Citation needed. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 21 15:09:19 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:09:19 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the >> concept of cheit to have meaning. > Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon kodeim > haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. When someone never had a chance to really exercise bechirah, what would block their hana'as ziv haShechinah when they get to the olam ha'emes? That was the way I was thinking of the issue when I posed the question. After asking around, I was made to realize another option: It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room upward. Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a falling rock could be a cause? And this issues grows when you think about it. Re'uvein is meqareiv Shimon as a teenager. Shimon grows up, marries a shomeres Shabbos, and raises a family. Generations of people performing mitzvos, all because of Re'uvein. Now, in a parallel universe, years after Shimon gets married he still doesn't have children r"l, goes for testing and finds out he is infertile. Re'uvein couldn't know. Re'uvein did everything exactly the same as in the first universe. But his actions don't produce generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. Perhaps some, people Shimon influenced, but not of the same scale. Should the Re'uvein in this version of the story get less sekhar for the same choices and the same actions? What if r"l 2 weeks after a man's petirah, his only child is niftar. Say a totally unexpected brain aneurism. The child who would have made a siyum mishnayos, who would have made siyumim every year on his yahrzeit, who would have given matan beseiser le'ilui nishmaso,would would have said Qaddish. All those mitzvos don't get done, but through nothing the father did or could even have known about. Does he get a lower place in gan eden because of it? How do we satisfy straightforward notions of Dayan haEmes with these things? 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 rygb at aishdas.org Fri Dec 18 11:50:40 2020 From: rygb at aishdas.org (Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 14:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> References: <20201218194453.GB19995@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 12/18/2020 2:44 PM, Micha Berger wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres > who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough for the > concept of cheit to have meaning. > > Would such a neshamah have descended at all, to have a place to rise > back up to? [Digest people: I know this is just a bunch of "?". RYGB quotes Yosef Ometz pg 331. Saying that: The value of Qaddish etc... for avaeilim is that each tefillah elevates the meis. Not just ofr amei ha'aratzos, but learning Torah is also 14x (shiva'atayim) more effective than any tefillah, more so chiddushei Torah. There is no measure to the kavod the father thereby gets in yeshivah shel maalah. So says medrash that has been hidden for generations. Therefore, ever avel for a father or mother should try their hardes to learn whatever they can according to their intellectual abililty.] *??? ?' ???? ????? ??? ????????? ???? '???? ????':* /*???? ??????? ????? ?????? ????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ??????, ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ?????. ??? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ??????, ??? ????? ???? ????? ??????? ??? ?????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???. ??? ??? ???? ?????? ????, ??? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?? ????, ?? ???? ????? ????? ????. ??? ?? ??? ?? ?? ??? ????? ???????? ???? ?????? ?????? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?????. (???? 331)*/ [Email #2. -micha] There is no limit up to illui neshama. See the last Gemara in Moed Kattan (Bavli). The seforim say on every yahrzeit the neshama goes up a notch. Mitzvos generated in this world by the catalyst of the neshama for which we do the mitzvos are uplifted by the zechus of having caused additional illumination in this world. YGB From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 18:47:56 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:47:56 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 6:09 PM Micha Berger wrote: > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 08:48:08PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > RMB: I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres who only lived 11 weeks, and therefore didn't become old enough > for the concept of cheit to have meaning. > > ZL: Must one's neshamah have a cheit to have an aliyah? Adam Harishon > kodeim haCheit also had opportunity to rise to greater heights. > > RMB: ...It is possible that there is no maximum hana'ah a human is capable > of, and therefore whereever they are beshe'as petirah, there is still room > upward. > Yes, that's what I meant. > > RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? > Yes, this is indeed a problem if the only way one's neshama can have an aliyah is because one made choices to make oneself deserve it. You give two examples that illustrate the problem. Here's a simpler one. Someone is niftar, and people learn mishnayos le'ilui nishmaso. He didn't inspire them to do that. But their learning is still a gift to him that he gains. It seems that the concept is that Hashem gave people the power to gift each other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should gain wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From doniels at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 06:01:25 2020 From: doniels at gmail.com (Danny Schoemann) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:01:25 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: "I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks" I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. (I understand that everything I do is "credited" to whoever made/enabled/persuaded me to do it. E.g. parents, Rebbes, friends. That's part of their "actions". Though even that needs to be clarified; the billions of Tehilim said during the Holocaust - are they credited to A.H. and his gang of thugs? may they rot, etc.) So if I learn a Mishna, it gets credited to me, and some kickback to my Alef-Beis teacher, my parents and all their ancestors. (Assuming that never dissuaded me from doing such things, I imagine.) Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) Sources "supporting" this view are abundant, starting at Rav Hai Gaon & Rav Sherira Gaon who both wrote that doing good deeds for others is nonsense. Some of these sources can be seen at https://www.sefaria.org.il/sheets/57393.30 B'Kitzur, the M.Y. teaches us that we toil in this world to reap in the next. Prep on Friday to eat on Shabbos, etc. Le'ilui nishmas seems to undermine that. Do as you wish in this world and somebody will hopefully come along and fix your mistakes le'ilui nishmas your misguided soul. I'd like an explanation how to reconcile the MY and le'ilui nishmas. Kol Tuv - Danny From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 08:11:45 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:11:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 04:01:25PM +0200, Danny Schoemann via Avodah wrote: > I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means at the best of times, > since it seems to negate the entire foundation of Jewish Life, as > described, say, by the Mesilath Yeshorim. > I.e.: Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here. And this is murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual illness which has symptoms. RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. As does just our basic instincts of fairness. So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: I heard R Tendler discuss it with a talmid who was sitting shiv'ah. I also heard the same answer (same as far as I can tell) from R Herschel Schachter. A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions down there. As are the consequences of those actions. A person isn't getting the zekhus of the child saying Qaddish, he is getting the zekhus of raising a child who would say Qaddish. Now, adding my own layer: And if the son figures as much, and decides that therefore actually saying Qaddish is redundant, to the extent that that decision was caused by the parent in question, that also reflects on the quality of their feelings attitudes and behaviors when they were down here. And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. We would just have less testimony to the greatness of his actions in olam hazeh. (Presumably Shim'on would be positively influencing people in other ways. The impact is just less obvious without the concentration of impacted people that parenthood creates.) 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 zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 10:08:40 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:08:40 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 11:12 AM Micha Berger wrote: > ... Your place in Neshoma-Land is defined by your actions down here...is > murach from statements like the Iqarim (4:33) saying that > geihinom's fires are those of shame. Or that Rabbeinu Yonah (Shaarei > Teshuvah 4:1) compares oneshim to illness -- aveiros cause spiritual > illness which has symptoms. > > RCVolozhiner (Derekh haChaim 1:21) says that onesh is causal based on > Eiruvin 19a "'emeiq' - shema'amiqin lahen geihinom" -- the sinner is > called "eimeq" because they deepen geihinom for themselves. > > All of which argue against R' Zvi Lampel (haBaal haDynamics) the idea > that zekhus or lack thereof can be a fungible. > > As does just our basic instincts of fairness. > I agree. My suggestion would only be a valid opposing shittah if a mekor in Chazal/Rishonim for it would be found. (Or if minhag Yisrael would be a valid mekor...uh oh, getting into that bnei niviim thing...) > > > So, to get back to RDS's difficulty: > > ... > A person's place in the olam ha'emes is indeed defined by their actions > down there. ... he is getting the zekhus > of raising a child who would say Qaddish. > > ... > And in my earlier example of Re'uvein who was meqareiv Shim'on. Re'uvein's > feelings attitudes and actions are the same whether it later turns > out that Shim'on is r"l infertile or raises generations of shomerei > Torah uMitzvos. And so, I would think that even if those children never > materialize, Re'uvein's sekhar would be the same. ... > But your original problem, I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres who only lived 11 weeks,... will still remain unsolved, no? Zvi Lampel > 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) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 10:39:22 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: <20201222161145.GB10712@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222183922.GD30112@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 01:08:40PM -0500, Zvi Lampel wrote: > But your original problem, >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a nifteres >> who only lived 11 weeks,... >> will still remain unsolved, no? Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for compromises. Maaseh Bereishis vs science as well. I've grown to be happier with an "I don't know", or maybe even the Moreh's "we can't know" than a lot of the suggestions that get published. It is gaavah on the part of our era to think that we've finally gotten to the emes of how the world works, and the time has come for humanity to answer all the open questions. Tir'u baTov! -Micha From mendel at case.edu Sun Dec 20 19:25:50 2020 From: mendel at case.edu (Mendel Singer) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2020 22:25:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: <0cd85111-ab21-a365-d9a1-8f45e596d288@case.edu> On 12/18/2020 1:17 PM, Prof. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From > https://together.ou.org/page/guidance > > Guidance Regarding COVID-19 > Guidance Statements & Policies. December 15, 2020 11:45 AM EST. OU/RCA > COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance. The following is shared based on the > guidance of our poskim, Harav Hershel Schachter " and Harav > Mordechai Willig ", with the support of Harav Dovid Cohen ". ... I just heard Rav Willig tonight say that he asked for the language to say "requires us" instead of merely "strongly encouraging" but I was sure he said he was disappointed that they didn't go with that language. I see in the link there are 2 paragraphs, one with each language. Reading this carefully, the 3 poskim all said "requires", but the OU only said "strongly encourage". Here are the 2 paragraphs: The poskim: Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider, the Torah obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. OU: In consideration of the guidance of our poskim, we strongly encourage all those eligible to access the COVID-19 vaccination to do so. We hope and pray that such steps will help bring to an end the tragic toll that the pandemic has taken on our community and beyond. mendel From JRich at Segalco.com Mon Dec 21 21:10:41 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 05:10:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Fw: COVID vaccine In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: I think the general thrust was to consult with your doctor but for the vast Majority there is a chiyuv to take it Kt Joel rich Sent from my iPhone On Dec 22, 2020, at 2:49 AM, gil.student--- via Avodah wrote: ? CAUTION: External Sender Here is the shiur: https://www.yutorah.org/lectures/lecture.cfm/982075/rabbi-mordechai-i-willig-rabbi-dr-aaron-glatt-rabbi-yaakov-glasser/the-covid-vaccine-halacha-and-public-policy-a-communal-conversation/ Gil Student On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:06 AM Prof. L. Levine > wrote: From Steven cooper, MD ?Dr Aaron Glatt says EVERYONE should get the vaccine, even elderly, even immune compromised And, says ??? ????? Willig, ??????, based on the ???? ?????, the ????, the ????? and other ?????, that we have a ???? ????????? to get this vaccine!! _______________________________________________ Avodah mailing list Avodah at lists.aishdas.org http://lists.aishdas.org/listinfo.cgi/avodah-aishdas.org THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Mon Dec 21 15:58:03 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:58:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rav Saadia Gaon, Kabbalah, Gilgul, Eilu vaEilu In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201221235803.GH1536@aishdas.org> Branching from the discussion: Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:08:02PM -0600, Brent Kaufman via Avodah wrote: > Some time after that, R. Saadia, might take you aside and tell you one of > two things. > Either he would say: > "Yes, I said that because there was reason to be careful of that kind of > spiritual Zeitgeist, at the time I wrote it... > > Or he would say: > "Yes, I did write that, and I was incorrect..." Or, gilgul isn't a thing. It's a bit presumptuous to assume that one of the last people who actually came quite close to being rabban shel kol Yisrael didn't mean what he said or didn't know the topic thoroughly. I think the machloqes needs be left open. > "The time wouldn't come for another 600 years, that it > would be the Ratzon HaBorei to reveal these things to a wider public. He > did so by sending..."* There are deep problems with the progressive revelation approach to the origins of Qabbalah. Because once you believe that we needed further revelations after Sinai, you are opening up a Pandora's Box. I would faster believe it's all in the original revelation, if only latently and requiring an accumulation of learning until it is all dug up. Like the take on the gemara about Moshe sitting in the 8th row in Rabbi Aqiva's halakhah shiur that says that Moshe didn't recognize what R Aqiva taught and yet R Aqiva attributed those teaching to Moshe because Moshe got the pieces, and it took Rabbi Aqiva and the generations of work he built on until the conclusion was put together. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The same boiling water http://www.aishdas.org/asp that softens the potato, hardens the egg. Author: Widen Your Tent It's not about the circumstance, - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF but rather what you are made of. From zvilampel at gmail.com Mon Dec 21 14:22:09 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 17:22:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] min hatorah In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maharatz Chiyos deals with this in his Mevo HaTalmud (Chap. 5), and more extensively in his Toras Neviim, Maamar Divrei Neviim Divrei Kabalah (Chap. 2-3). He references the Rambam's Shoresh Sheyni Sefer HaMitzvos, which in turn cites (San. 22b and M.K. 5a), ''Before Ezekiel came and told us this, who had stated it?" Maharatz Chiyos explains (translation by R. Jacob Schecter, ''The Students Guide Through The Talmud, Feldheim Publishers, NY 1960), What they meant was that it was not the prophet who initiated the ruling, because he indeed has no authority to do so, but he must have been in possession of a traditional law to which he only gave textual support. In other words, prophets only recorded halachoth which had already been received orally as Sinaitic laws, and so revealed nothing new, since those rulings had been in existence already as oral law. I have already dealt at length with this category of halachoth in my Treatise, Torath Nebiim, quoted above. I would only refer the conclusions reached there, namely, that these rulings which may appear, at first sight, to have been laid down by the Prophets, were none other than halachoth transmitted orally from Sinai, for the writing down of which they had received the necessary divine permission. *He begins his chapter on Mevo HaTalmud by saying that most matters learned from Nach have the same status as anything learned from Chumash, based upon the references you and I have cited, as well as several others. So, it comes out that Chazal had a kabalah that these matters were in Torah Shebe-al Peh MiSinai, but knew that they were not indicated in Toras Moshe, or could not find any such indication. But they pointed out that they found that they were eventually committed to either explicit or drash-indicated writing in Nach.* Zvi Lampel > > From: "Rich, Joel" > > The Gemara chulin 17b asks "Minayin lbdikat sakin min hatorah" (from where > do we know that a shechita knife must be checked) and answers with a pasuk > from navi. I couldn't find another gemara that asks this question and > answers with a pasuk not from the Torah. Thoughts? > ------------------------------------------------- > Through a data search I found two more: > Sanhedrin 91b... minayin l-tchias mesim min haTorah...Shir HaShirim 52:8 > Bechoros 50a...Bikshu lignoz dinarei Hadriana, Tiryna, Shiappa mipnei > tabah shel Yerushalayim, ad shamatsu lah mikrah min haTorah she-hu > mutar...Yechezkel 7:22 > And then ''remez min haTorah minayin: > Moed Kattan 5a...remez letsion kevaros min hatorah minayin...Yechezkel > 39:15 > Zvi Lampel > ------------------------------ > And any thoughts on why Chazal would broadly define Torah in this way in > such limited circumstances? > KT > Joel RIch > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 07:51:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:51:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would Yosef have heard about it? To the best of his knowledge Yitzchak might well still be alive, so why no mention of him? (We may presume he also inquired about Bilhah and the pasuk just doesn't bother telling us, but it seems strange that it would omit an inquiry about Yitzchak.) -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 21 13:01:47 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 21:01:47 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] If all the nations of the world Message-ID: The following is from an address Rav Shimon Schwab gave at the 1987 Aguda Convention titled The Jew in Golus: How High a Profile. The entire essay is available at https://agudah.org/wp-content/uploads/1988/02/JO1988-V21-N01.pdf es. - Agudath Israel of America THE JEW IN GoLUS The Struggles of the JEWINGOLUS -I? LL &Q&J based on an address by Rabbi Mordechai Gifter N"IJ'J~. Rosh Ha yeshiva qf Telshe Wickl!ff e, Ohio, and a member qf the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah (Council of Torah Sages} qf Agudath Israel of America delivered at the recent national convention qf Agudath Israel of America THE ROLE OF THE JEW agudah.org YL >From Rav Schwab's talk If all the nations of the world and it's a tendency today to think this way-are depraved, foolish and wicked, it is no distinction to be better than those who are depraved, foolish and wicked. That is no basis for praise to the Ribbono Shel Olam. By the same token, gratitude for being given the Torah cannot be meaningful if all non-Torah science is nonsense. if all secular knowledge is without value. What glory is ascribed to Torah knowledge if its distinction is simply that it is superior to nonsense? To the contrary. Chazal have told us that there is indeed chachma (wisdom) amongst the nations. As a matter of fact. upon seeing a wise non.Jew, one pronounces a blessing, praising G-d "for having given of His knowledge to [a creature of] flesh-andblood." But all their knowledge-all their sciences and all their wisdom- sh rinks into absolute nothingness before the majesty of one kutzo shel Yud (small stroke in the sacred Torah. Yet an attitude of disdain for the other nations Is to be expected. as a natural outgrowth of having suffered the recent decimating churban in Europe-and I am a witness to it. After such barbaric behavior by one of the world's most civilized nations, and silent indifference on the part of so much of the rest of the world, many of us have lost basic respect for the opinions of mankind. Because of our anger and our deep pain, we have developed an attitude of "Who cares what other nations say?" We have seen their civilization and culture collapse in a major catastrophe. We have been deafened by the silence of the so-called moral majority of decent people. We no longer care. Let them say what they want! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 21 21:38:09 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 00:38:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] =?utf-8?q?If_Asara_B=E2=80=99Teives_would_fall_on_Satur?= =?utf-8?q?day=2C_the_fast_would_be_observed_on_Shabbos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I very much doubt it. It's all very well for the Avudraham to posit this as an academic exercise, but if it were actually possible for it to happen then I'm reasonably confident nobody would actually pasken that way. Only because it's an impossible hypothetical do we amuse ourselves by playing with the idea. Until the modern calendar was established in the mid-4th century CE, the tenth *could* fall on Shabbos, and yet there is no mention in the mishna or gemara of such a halacha. Also the Rambam, who lays down the halacha for all times, not just modern times, mentions nothing of this. He doesn't even bother ruling against it; the idea that it could be so simply never arises. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 22 08:59:49 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:59:49 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] May One Make Kiddush Before Tzais This Friday? Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year the fast of Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Must we fast until tzeis ha?kochavim (night fall when stars are visible), or should we make Kiddush early to avoid fasting on Shabbos? A. The Gemara (Eiruvin 41a) relates that one year, Tisha B?Av fell out on Friday (this can no longer happen, due to our set calendar). Late in the afternoon, they brought Rebbi Akiva an egg and he ate it, to show his students that one may not enter Shabbos in a state of fasting. Rebbi Yossi said that one completes the fast. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha follows the ruling of Rebbi Yossi. However, there is a disagreement among Rishonim as to the meaning of Rebbi Yossi?s words. The Mordechai (Eiruvin 41a) cites the opinion of the R?I, that Rebbi Yossi also agrees that one may end the fast early. His argument was only that he holds that one is permitted to continue fasting into the night even though it is Shabbos. Yet, if one wants to break the fast early, it is permissible to do so. However, many Rishonim (including the Tosfos Shantz, Rashba, Ritva and Ran) explain that Rebbi Yossi requires finishing the fast even though it is Shabbos. This is also the ruling of Shulchan Aruch (OC 249:4). The Rema however differentiates between a public fast and a private fast. On a public fast such as Asara B?Teives one must complete the fast until tzeis ha?kochavim. However, regarding a private fast, one may break the fast after being mekabel Shabbos (accepting Shabbos), which takes place during maariv, even if one makes early Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From larry62341 at optonline.net Mon Dec 21 07:01:15 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:01:15 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: At 07:30 AM 12/21/2020,Zev Sero wrote: >On 20/12/20 11:10 am, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: >> I have never understood this custom.? The hours between 6 and 7 PM >> differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is >> controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it >> is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. >No, it does not differ, except by the modern adjustment from actual >solar time to Railroad Time. On any given day Noon and Midnight are at >exactly the same time all over the world, again before adjusting for >Railroad Time. And *mean* noon and midnight (which according to all >opinions are used by halacha for "molad zaken", and according to RMF's >family kabala are also used for all other purposes) are the same all >over the world every day, again with the same modern adjustment. But people are not using solar time when they do not make kiddush between 6 and 7 PM. They are using local time, so what do they accomplish by not making kiddush between 6 and 7 pm local time? [Email #2. -micha] Recently I wrote that I simply do not understand this custom given that the hour between 6 and 7 PM differs depending upon where one is in the world. I received the following comments about this. > I once was in a group discussion with the professor of astronomy, > who was teaching a course I was taking while at Harvard. One of the > group asked about astrology, and how the professor could be so sure that > it was not true . He answered that when he was young, he investigated > astrology with the same question. But he soon realized that most of their > astronomical claims, such as "Saturn is ascending," were factually wrong. > They were basing their predictions not on astronomical facts, but on > statements made in books on astrology, and to most of them the actual > facts were irrelevant. > I harbor my doubts that most chasidic rebbes even understand the > implications of the fact that the earth is round and rotates and revolves. > Most balebatim do not really understand the implications, either, so how > would a rebbe, who never learned basic astronomy and math? As far as > chasidim are concerned, a statement like "Mars is the astrological sign > controlling the world" is believed just as are stories of miracles wrought > by this or that rebbe.. They do not want to be disturbed by actual facts. and from the same person > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. From another person > Also, I think it should be dependent on real time which is local solar > time. I can't believe that the time when Mars is controlling the world > has anything to do with Eastern Standard Time which was only instituted > about one hundred and twenty years ago. I believe as recently as the > 1890s New York was 6 minutes ahead of Philadelphia. Many may not be aware that time of day was not standardized until the 18th Century and in some places not until the 19th Century.. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_time#History Until the latter part of the 18th century, time was normally determined in each town by a local sundial of a location and enabled a precise time to be applied. Such new-found precision did not overcome a different problem: the differences between the local times of neighbouring towns. In Britain, local time differed by up to 20 minutes from that of London.... Before the arrival of the railways, journeys between the larger cities and towns could take many hours or days, and these differences could be dealt with by adjusting the hands of a watch periodically en route... However, this variation in local times was large enough to present problems for the railway schedules. ... It soon became apparent that even such small discrepancies in times caused confusion, disruption, or even accidents. Railway time - Wikipedia Railway time was the standardised time arrangement first applied by the Great Western Railway in England in November 1840, the first recorded occasion when different local mean times were synchronised and a single standard time applied.... See the above URL for more. BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. We are supposed to know when the Molad is when we bentsch Rosh Chodesh, yet most people think that the time announced is local time and do not really know when the Molad is where they are living. In some shuls they also announce the Molad in local time. [Email #3. -micha] Reb Zalman Alpert, who comes from an old Chabad family, sent me the following: They got it all wrong. This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. As if any scientist can prove the nissin in the Torah according to the laws of science or the schemes of creation as plotted by the Ari.,Rashbi or for that matter Chazal in midrashim. How about the stories of Rabba bar bar Chona or the fact that Rav Yehuda haNasi made kiddush after he was dead?! Let's write an essay disproving that. What does science have to do with this? Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the Rebbe would not waive it! In this case of The Holy Rebbe of Vishnitz, we learn a serious moral and ethical lesson. instead people go crazy about so called science. Has anyone proved the Torah is true according to scientific facts? You need to read Ahad HaAms essay on Moshe, although AH was not a believer. it's a powerful essay as well as is Bialik.s essay on Halacha and Aggada. By the way, can the fellow at MIT prove Zimzum, sefirot Adam, kadmon, sitra achra, etc, etc,, Bad news for all the haters here the Holy Gra of Vilna and all greats like Rav Kook, Dessler, and Elyashev. They all believed in doctrine of zimzum and sefirot. Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, as Halacha trumps all. When the Holy Shinever rav of Galicia, son of the Divre Chaim, visited Czarist Russia on a matter of heter Agunah, he went to Brisk. to Rav Diskin, later of Jslm, who aided him. Then the Shinever said he was off to Kovno to see the Kovno rav RIES ZL, the greatest posek of Russi. Rabbi Diskin begged him not to go, because the Jews of Kovna have no concept of chassidus, of a Rebbe and of their conduct. And The Rebbe did not go. Same is true here. The MO community has no idea, as they say in Yiddish vi men est dos - how to understand chasidic thought and customs. By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew science lechud and Yahadus lechud. Zalman Alpert From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:08:59 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:08:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Branching new thread from: Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:01:15AM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > BTW, in most shuls the Molad is announced using Jerusalem solar time, > not local time where one is or even local Jerusalem time. Because the practice is older than railroads and timezones. Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. If you figure out the mean time of lunation, it's accurate for a meridian somewhere even further East than the Jews in Bavel. Qandahar Afghanistan or so. And if you add time after that, because there has to be some sliver of the new moon for eidim to see, you get even further east. However, the average time between new moons (lunation) is not a constant down the centuries. It is getting longer; in other words, the moon is slowing down. Energy is being spent pulling the tides around. And that drag is making the moon's trip around the earth take longer. (Also, the earth is spinning slower for the same reason. In other words, our units of measure -- days, hours (day / 24) and chalaqim are longer than Chazal's. But that's a smaller effect.) So, nowadays the mean time between lunations (even when measured in days and pieces of days) is just a shade longer than the molad. And this has been adding up to the molad time every month for centuries so that we're now talking the ballpark of a couple of hours. I would therefore think that better than asking where the molad is most accurate *now*, but for what meridian was the molad accurate for when the din was established? As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting the announcement of the molad time. So, to ask the updated question: Where was the molad most accurate in the last days of the amora'im? The answer still isn't Yerushalayim ih"q. But someplace where the clock would read 23 min or so later. In today's terms, it's somewhere around where Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan meet. Let's say this line of reasoning is correct. (I am pretty sure the actual math is; Google showed me others who reached the same conclusion.) Why would they have chosen the clock at that meridian? One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY and Bavel. So, if you announce the time for the middle of the region, you minimize how far off it is in everyone's local time. I like to call it "Ur Kasdim Time". 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 micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 14:23:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:23:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: <20201221230919.GD1536@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201222222302.GC21818@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:51:16AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... Was Yoseif really asking about Yaaqov either? Or was it a followup to "ani Yoseif". As in: Oh Yehudah, you just made that impassioned argument that you couldn't keep Binyamin because you are so worried about our father's wellfare. "I'm Yoseif. Well, is father still alive" after what you told him happened to me? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Every child comes with the message http://www.aishdas.org/asp that God is not yet discouraged with Author: Widen Your Tent humanity. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:39:06 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:39:06 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > From: Zev Sero > > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? ... To the best of his > knowledge Yitzchak might well still be > alive, so why no mention of him? ... > > This is answered according to the approach (I posted back in 2006) that Yosef was afraid that his father may have agreed with his sons that for his own good he needed to be sent to golus. (After all, the last two things we are told about their relationship is is that when Yosef reported his second dream, ''Vayigar bo aviv,'' [and Yosef was not a mind reader to know ''v'aviv shamar ess hadavar], and that Yaakov sent Yosef out to his brothers [why? to protect them?], who sent Yosef to golus.) And now, after all these years, Yaakov did not order his sons to find Yosef and bring him home. Yosef did not know his father thought he was killed by an animal. So either Yaakov was in on it (and it would have been pointless for Yosef to send a letter home, and a chutzpa for him to report that he became Viceory of Egypt), or...Yaakov was no longer alive. This is why Yosef was so concerned particularly about whether his father was still alive, and asked about his welfare every time his brothers came to him. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 14:59:12 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 17:59:12 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 13:39:22 -0500 > > > ZL: > But your original problem, > >> I really don't know what le'ilui nishmas means when speaking of a > nifteres > >> who only lived 11 weeks,... > >> will still remain unsolved, no? > > Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation is valid, somehow (although we don't know how) not in contradiction to the sources you've brought (or in compliance with unknown sources that say otherwise), and your feelings of fairness. Which premises I think you are working with. Which, I think, brings us into the territory of the assumed validity of minhagei Yisrael and the concept of bnei neviim heim. Which I think you generally accept. Right? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 22 15:50:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:50:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 22/12/20 5:08 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad *interval* > was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the molad actually > happened similarly most accurate? Those are likely the same question > because the molad interval was most accurate in the mid-4th cent. Around > when our calendar was set up -- our most likely generation for enacting > the announcement of the molad time. The practice of *announcing* the molad before birkas hachodesh is extremely recent. Early- to mid- 20th century. Traditionally there was no announcement. Siddurim included an instruction that it is proper to *know* the molad at that time, so people would try to find it out, but for some reason the idea of informing everyone in the most efficient manner, by announcing it just before they needed to know it, didn't occur to anyone until recently. So the rest of the discussion is not about the announcement but about the time itself. The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but it's not necessarily the time it was enacted. It could just as easily have been slightly short at the time, just as it's slightly long now. I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now precisely when it was accurate. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From larry62341 at optonline.net Tue Dec 22 15:45:49 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 18:45:49 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ > In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in > accordance with Jerusalem time. > To explain what Jerusalem time means, we must first understand the > difference between civil time and solar time. In civil time, noon is > 12:00 p.m. In solar time, noon is the time when the sun reaches its > highest position in the sky. This is called high noon (or Chatzos in > halachic terms). There can be a significant disparity between the > civil noon and solar noon. For example, in the summer, the two times > may be an hour apart. > Jerusalem time is based on solar time. 1:00 p.m. in Jerusalem time is > one hour after high noon, which may be 1:30 p.m or 1:45 p.m in civil time. > WHEN THE MOLAD IS ANNOUNCED, IT IS THE TIME OF THE MOLAD IN JERUSALEM > BASED ON SOLAR TIME. (My emphasis) YL From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:57:28 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:57:28 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: . R' Danny Schoemann asked: > Now I decide it's le'ilui nishmas a certain Opa who's Yahrzeit > it is. Why & how would he get more credit than anybody else? > Maybe because I'm learning specifically because it's his > Yahrzeit? But that's not an "action" he did. > > Forget about learning a Mishna for a random childless niftar. > How on earth does that work? or: how in heaven does that work? ;-) I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is to do a favor for the tzadik. So too here. The learning is not a result of anything that Opa did. But the learner is pained that Opa is gone, and he asks Hashem to redirect the s'char of the learning into Opa's account. Or even if the learner has zero pain about Opa being gone, he can still redirect the s'char the same way. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 17:16:18 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 20:16:18 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:45:49PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote: > At 05:08 PM 12/22/2020, Micha Berger wrote: >> Except it isn't solar time for Yerushalayim. > From https://oukosher.org/halacha-yomis/how-is-the-molad-calculated/ >> In addition, it is worth noting that the molad is announced in >> accordance with Jerusalem time. ... I already explained why I think it cannot be, as it would have been 23 minutes off in the last days of the Sanhedrin if they meant J-m local time. I don't know what else to add. I just think people assume Y-m time, because it just seems obvious. Then we get to the Rambam, who we cannot just dismiss like that... On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 06:50:22PM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > The point of difficulty I have with your explanation is that it rests on an > assumption that the interval in our tradition was completely precise when it > was enacted. It seems to me that it was always rounded to the nearest > chelek; if there happened to be a time when it was precise, that's nice, but > it's not necessarily the time it was enacted.... It's more than that... The time it was most accurate "just happened" to be the same generation that established our calendar. (Minus one dechiyah window that didn't get resolved until R Saadia Gaon.) To me, that just cries "siyata diShmaya". But the minimum for the error margin for the time of the molad on Y-m ih"q local time is not zero. It is on month number 44,609, Tammuz 3607, 154 BCE, 10 years after Chanukah. You get to earlier months than that, and the the molad as a multiple of days becomes too short again. That minimum is 15min 27 sec (and I neglected to write the chalaqim) off. That would be a meridian a little over 4deg East of Y-m. Again, I have made numerous math errors here in the past. I am only confident this time because any Google hit of someone else who did the work got similar results. (Or at least, once I googled and fixed my errors, we have the same results. ) At least with my assumptions, we get very close to the middle of the yishuv in the days when VeSein Tal uMatar was set to either EY's climate or Bavel's. I am not sure what we gain by being only 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > I do think the plain implication in the Rambam is that it was *intended* to > be Y'm time, and therefore was set a few centuries earlier than you suppose, > or else the rate of change has itself changed and we can't know now > precisely when it was accurate. We can know the curve exactly, unless you want to say nishtaneh hateva and orbital mechanics worked differently back then. I looked for "Yerushalayim" and "Yerushalaim" (without a second yud) in Hil Qidush haChodesh on Bar Ilan. I found the latter in a few places about yom tov sheini shel goliyus, and then this one, which is I assume your maqor. See 11:17. The Rambam talks about basing his calculations on the city of Y-m and the other places that surround it, during the 6 or 7 days in which we always see the moon and come and testify in court. And this area is off about 33 degrees (from 35 to 29) north of the equator that encircles the world. And it is also off about 24 degrees (until 27 to 21) west of the median line of civilization. We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the Rambam's maps. But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than from Egypt or points west, it's not impossible that he didn't nmean an area CENTERED on Y-m as much as one centered on the middle of the population that would come to testify there. It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with Kepler. And I don't think we have to. Tzarikh od iyun. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger Life isn't about finding yourself. http://www.aishdas.org/asp Life is about creating yourself. Author: Widen Your Tent - George Bernard Shaw - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From akivagmiller at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:50:38 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 21:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: . R' Zev Sero asked: > Why didn't Yosef also ask about his grandfather? After all, > Yitzchak had only passed away ten years earlier. How would > Yosef have heard about it? Yosef knew that Yaakov was alive. He knew it because the brothers kept talking about their father, and I can't imagine that Yosef thought the brothers were lying about it. Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* question. And it was part of Yosef's strategy of inducing the brothers to do teshuva: "You keep talking about what the loss of Binyamin would do to your father. What about MY father? Is he still alive? Somehow he survived losing ME, right?" If Yosef needed to ask about Yaakov's health, then (as RZS suggests) he would have asked about the entire mishpacha. But that's not what Yosef was doing. Akiva Miller NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." But I learned it to be a rhetorical question, designed to help the brothers to do teshuva, and unfortunately I do not remember where I picked that up from. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 19:43:23 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:43:23 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:50:38PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > Therefore, I have always understood "Ha'od Avi Chai?" to be a *rhetorical* > question... I posted something similar to the first line I quoted, and AFTER I learned Seforno. (He's in my shenayim miqra learning this year.) As we both wrote, this is in response to Yehudah writing about how the non-return of Binyamin would kill their father. The only way it could be a real question is if he were arguing that Yehudah was lying. But then, why doesn't Yosef wait for a reply? What does he do instead? He reiterates, according to Seforno, giving more detail to convince them he really was Yoseif. His whole conversation is about his being Yoseif. But the rhetorical read also has an oddity. First, he tells them how bad what they did was. They not only sinned against him, they sinned against Yaaqov too, in all the ways Yehudah is now arguing. Then... It's not your fault; it's Hashem's plan for how I would become regent and we would be saved from the famine. > NOTE: I do concede that Sforno takes the question seriously: "It's > impossible that he didn't die from his worrying about me." ... The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: ha'od avi chai: i edshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai I didn't assume the Seforno was saying peshat is that the question is real. I learned the Seforno as though he was saying Yoseif meant: Stop telling me how worried you are about the daagah of Binyamin coming back, nafsho kesurah benafsho and all that. If you really believed that, you would have thought "it were impossible for him to have survived the pain of losing me." I found the above argument so compelling, it didn't cross my mind that the Seforno was making an assertion rather than a leshitaskha accusation reinforcing the rhetorical read of the pasuq itself. Tir'u baTov! -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 Tue Dec 22 19:50:38 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 22:50:38 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223035038.GB7830@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 05:59:12PM -0500, Zvi Lampel via Avodah wrote: >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for >> compromises.... > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... Which situations? Qaddish for a parent was something I already posted about. RMT and RHS have a perfectly rational way of explaining Hashem's Justice. The parent gets reward for whatever they did to inspire the child to say Qaddish, Borkhu, learn Torah, give tzedaqah or whatever. Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. But I think that regardless of whether a person can get zekhus for a mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish with kavvanah, why not say it? On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 07:57:28PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > I understand these situations to be similar to when one asks a tzadik to > daven for him. The tzadik is pained to some non-zero degree about the > petitioner's problem, and he asks Hashem to fix the situation. If Hashem > does so, it's not because of any zechus of the petitioner, but rather it is > to do a favor for the tzadik. But because the state of the petitioner is undeserved harm to him. Unless the person praying for the niftar has some idea of what's happening to the niftar and how his tefillah alleviated is, there is no balancing of the tzadiq's account. And for that matter, the person who didn't get some nisayon still needs to get the work done in some other way. A niftar who isn't getting the correcting effect of onesh or lack of sekhar... how else would he get the work done? Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger I slept and dreamt that life was joy. http://www.aishdas.org/asp I awoke and found that life was duty. Author: Widen Your Tent I worked and, behold -- duty is joy. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore From micha at aishdas.org Tue Dec 22 20:08:10 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 23:08:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] If Asara B?Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223040810.GA24383@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 04:47:19PM +0000, Prof. L. Levine via Avodah wrote: > From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis > Q. The Beis Yosef (OC 550) quotes Sefer Avudraham ... that if Asara B'Teives would fall on Saturday, the fast would be observed on Shabbos.... Likely the BY, like most Sefaradim and many Ashkenazim, pronounced his name correctly: Abu-Dirham or maybe Abu-Darham. > In spite of this explanation, the Beis Yosef questions why Asara B'Teiveis > is unique? ... according to the Avudraham. We can't even assume that is would the Mechaber would hold if the question weren't hypothetical, because he is exploring one particular shitah. R Chaim Brown http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2020/12/would-we-fast-on-shabbos-for-10-teves.html just blogged on this topic. Rashi (Megillah 5a "aval", on the mishnah) explicitly says that not only 9 be'Av "me'achrin velo maqdimin", but 17 beTammuz and 10 beTeiveis as well. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megillah.5a.6?p2=Rashi_on_Megillah.5a.6.2 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 zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:02:04 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:02:04 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> References: <20201222220859.GB3624@aishdas.org> <20201223011618.GB11719@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <016dc8c3-cb90-3277-beea-76de9f679675@sero.name> On 22/12/20 8:16 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > We don't know where the 0 deg meridian, "mei'emtza hayishuv" was in the > Rambam's maps. Well, we do. 24 degrees east of Y'm. Rounded to the nearest degree, of course, since the maps weren't designed by Jews. > But, since more people testified in court from Bavel than > from Egypt or points west, Nobody could possibly have come from Bavel to testify about the new moon. They couldn't have made it in time. One would have to be Yaacov Avinu to do that trip in one day. > It's weak, I know. But the alternative is leaving the Rambam at odds with > Kepler. And I don't think we have to. We don't have to assume the calculation was ever completely accurate, or ever intended to be precise. Rounding is legitimate. If those who first determined the length of a month rounded it to the nearest chelek they could have been at any time, including Moshe Rabbenu. I don't think Moshe Rabbenu's month was long enough that it would be rounded to two chalakim instead of one. And that justifies the tradition that this length is HLLMMS (although that term isn't always meant literally). = = = By the way, I don't think "Hayishuv" here means "civilization", but rather the upper hemisphere, which is inhabitable, as opposed to the lower hemisphere which is ocean and thus uninhabitable. Before 1492 everyone thought the lower hemisphere was one vast ocean, and that's why nobody attempted to cross it. Nobody (including Columbus) knew that there was a continent in the middle, dividing it into two oceans, and making the trip doable. The geographers of the Rambam's day, apparently, had decided that the bounds of this upper hemisphere ran from about what we call 31 W to 149 E, and put the zero meridian in the middle. So on those maps Y'm's coordinates were 24 E, 32 N. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Wed Dec 23 07:09:50 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:09:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> References: <20201223034323.GA7830@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <95e5d477-1a56-dc4b-dbb9-640722b5e7ab@sero.name> On 22/12/20 10:43 pm, Micha Berger wrote: > The Seforno is short enough to read in transliteration: > ha'od avi chai: i efshar shelo meis mida'agaso alai The Shelah says that Yaacov *did* in fact die of his grief over Yosef's death. That is why the name Yaacov is never used during the 22 years he was gone. But Yisrael, who was not Yosef's father and didn't feel the grief quite as strongly, lived on, and so the body they both animated continued to function. When the news came that Yosef was alive, Vatechi Ruach Yaacov Avihem; Yaacov experienced Techiyas Hameisim, and from then that name is once again used. And that is why Yaacov Lo Meis -- he had already died and been resurrected, so he had no need to die again. Yisrael died, but Yaacov merely stopped animating their shared body and continued to exist in this world. I don't know how he explains David. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ddcohen at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 07:22:10 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 17:22:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: R' Micha Berger wrote: >> As I've posted in the past, we can equally ask: When the molad >> *interval*was most accurate, on whose clock was the *time* the >> molad actually happened similarly most accurate? ... >> ... One explanation I find plausible: It's somewhere around the >> middle of the Yishuv in those days, around half-way between EY >> and Bavel. I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. Rather, I think that the answer lies in "Molad VeYad," the molad Tishrei of Adam's creation according to R' Eliezer (Year 2, according to our counting), which is exactly at 14 hours and 0 chalakim into Friday (8:00 a.m.in our parlance). A molad (of any month) will only fall exactly on the hour, with no chalakim, approximately every 87.3 years. Having a molad Tishrei exactly on the hour is even rarer, with that happening, *on average*, just once every 1,080 years. It seems like an unlikely coincidence for this to have happened just by chance in what was considered by many to be the first month of our calendar. (We now call it Year 2, but the practice in Bavel was to call that year Year 1.) So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting point for calculations. Sure, you could then work backwards and calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's somewhat beside the point. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mgluck at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 22:51:10 2020 From: mgluck at gmail.com (Moshe Y. Gluck) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 01:51:10 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Orthodox Union Guidance Regarding Coronavirus In-Reply-To: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> References: <1A.E7.00463.B22FCDF5@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Message-ID: > > R' YL, quoting the OU (emphasis mine): > > Notwithstanding these factors, the conclusion of our poskim is that, > _pursuant to the advice of your personal health care provider,_ the Torah > obligation to preserve our lives and the lives of others requires us to > vaccinate for COVID-19 as soon as a vaccine becomes available. > > A few of the statements of guidance I've seen, including this one, basically come down to, "Ask your doctor and listen to what he/she says," rather than actually telling people to take the vaccine. A critical distinction, to me. KT, MYG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Wed Dec 23 13:27:05 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2020 16:27:05 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 05:22:10PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > I don't think that they *first* picked an exact meridian and *then* set the > molad to exactly correspond to the moment of the mean conjunction expressed > in the mean solar time of that meridian. Note that the molad is expressed > to the precision of a chelek, and mean solar time changes by one chelek for > every 50 "seconds of longitude." At the latitude of Jerusalem, that's > about 1.3 km. You'd have to explain why they chose exactly the meridian > that they did, and not 2 km to the west or 2 km to the east, which would > result in the molad being one chelek earlier or later. We aren't talking one cheileq, though. I'm going to step WAY back and start from alef. That means that I will be talking down to many people as I start, and hopefully fewer and fewer as I continue. There are two rounding issues with the molad, because we use the word "molad" to mean two things: 1- The halachic estimate of the average *duration* between two new moons. IOW, 29 days, 12 hours, 44 min 1 cheileq. 2- The time of a particular new moon. Like when the Chazan announces, "The molad will be at ...." About issue #1, the interval of the molad: The time between new moons is not a constant. The average time between new moons is also not a constant, it drifts down the centuries. (And even more weirdly so since we are measuring it using days and parts of a day, which also changes length compared to seconds on an atomic clock over the centuries.) So there is an error between the estimate halakhah decided was "good enough" and the exact value. In fact, since the interval between new moons is an irrational number of days, there is no way to express it as an exact number. Like pi or the square root of 2, for which halakhah also has sanctioned estimates -- 3 and 1-2/5, respectively. But this error in estimation, at any point since Adam to well past the year 7,000 is to the order of chalaqim, and really is within the room of saying Chazal estimated. About issue #2, the time of the molad: The effects of the error in #1 are cumulative, adding up 12 or 13 times per year, year after year, century after century. Here the difference between the announced molad and the time the new moon would be on average is to the order of minutes. How many minutes? Well, that depends which clock we're using to announce it in. We are definitely using standard hours, not solar ones. And we are definitely using local time rather than standard time, since the molad calculations predates trains and the invention of time zones (as R/Prof Levine pointed out). But which local time? The obvious assumption is Yerushalayim local time. But in that case, the error in the *time* of the molad would be 2 hours 42 sec: nowadays 22 min, 25 sec: when our calendar was established 15 min, 27 sec: at its minimum, 10 years before the first Chanukah (164bce) So our choices, as I see it, is: 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is Y-m local. I replied to Prof Levine forwarding the OU's claim that it is indeed Y-m standard time. I wrote to say I found this implausible. 15-22 min off is not a small error. To the extent that I cannot believe that's what the Rambam means either. And was looking for how that implication of the Rambam's words isn't a valid inferance. 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. I was advocating for the third option, because it is a convergance of three issues: a- the meridian where time is 22 min 25 sec later than Y-m arguably runs in the middle between di be'ar'a deYisrael di beBavel. b- this eliminates the error in the *time* of the molad is the era when our calendar was set up, and c- it is also the era when the *interval* between molads ("molad" definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical real new moons was within a cheileq. (And it includes the time when it was 0.) You can object to my support of #3 by saying that the precision of the interval is no big deal without touching my objection to the common assumption of Y-m standard. 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 llevine at stevens.edu Thu Dec 24 05:17:26 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:17:26 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Taking a Shower This Friday Message-ID: >From today's OU Kosher Halacha Yomis Q. This year, Asara B?Teives will be on Friday. Is one permitted to take a shower and haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos? A. Shulchan Aruch (550:2) writes that on all public fasts, except Tisha B?Av, one is permitted to wash and anoint themselves. However, the Mishnah Berurah (550:6) writes that a Bal Nefesh (one who is extra careful in observance of mitzvos) should refrain from these activities on all four of the public fast days. The Mishnah Berurah in Shar Hatziyun (550:8) goes even further. He writes that the general custom today is to be strict and refrain from bathing with hot water. This is also the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan (OC 550:3). Still, all the poskim write that when Asara B?Teives falls on a Friday, as it does this year, one is permitted to bathe normally (and take a haircut) in honor of Shabbos. Kitzur Shulchan Aruch (122:1) writes that one may not listen to music on Asara B?Teives. This would apply this year as well, since listening to music on erev Shabbos is not an honor for Shabbos. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 09:52:09 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l Message-ID: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> We must acknowledge the passing of Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l, a long time member of Avodah. Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining a solid marriage, raising 5 children, widely asked poseiq who published teshuvos that spanned all four Turim... And holding firm to a well defined line between what he held was acceptable an unacceptable innovations in how halakhah is applied to our situation. I would like to believe that his first stop in the olam ha'emes was like Rashi's depiction of Yaaqov and Yoseif's happier reunion -- resuming learning with R Eitam zt"l Hy"d whatever it was they were discussing when that conversation abruptly ended. Yehi zikhro barukh! Tir'u baTov! -Micha PS: RYHH was still lurking comparatively recently, sending occasional comments in private email. PPS to AhS Yomi learners: The AhS lost one its greatest defenders. RYHH's favoring the AhS as more authoritative than the MB (following his grandfather and followed by his son R Eitam) was frequent enough to make it onto his wikipedia page. -- 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 ddcohen at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 10:02:09 2020 From: ddcohen at gmail.com (David Cohen) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 20:02:09 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: Some of the following is copied from Facebook comments where R' Micha and I had more or less this same discussion 6 months ago, but I suppose we're repeating it here for the benefit of a different audience. :-) The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease by an entire chelek. If your degree of precision is that you're rounding to the nearest chelek, then the value of 29 days + 12 hours + 793 chalakim was accurate in the time of the Neo-Babylonian astronomers, it was accurate in the time when our calculated calendar was set up, and it's still accurate today. (The accumulated error of ~2 hours that we have now is due to the cumulative effect of the "rounding error.") It was, indeed, most *precise* -- in the sense of the actual value being exactly 793.000 chalakim -- in the 4th century CE, but if your level of precision is whole chalakim, then I wouldn't say that it's been *inaccurate* at any point. *** In objective (i.e. atomic) time, the length of the mean synodic month is actually slowly increasing, but it's increasing more slowly than the length of the mean solar day is, which means that it's decreasing when we measure time, as we customarily do, in mean solar days and divisions thereof. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. -- D.C. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 10:29:36 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 13:29:36 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Barukh Dayan haEmes -- Rav Yehudah Herzl Henkin zt"l In-Reply-To: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> References: <20201224175209.GA8520@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224182936.GA7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 12:52:09PM -0500, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > Aside from his more "minor" accomplishments, like building and maintaining > a solid marriage, raising 5 children... Correction: SIX children. I likely read an obit that discussed R Eitam and Rt Ne'ama separately, since their murder is worth a pause in a biograph, and something mentioning "5 other children". Tir'u baTov! -Micha From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 13:04:39 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:04:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/12/20 10:22 am, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > So I think that the molad was certainly set to be accurate for that > general area of the world , and hence that first molad was set for 14 > hours into Friday, rather than 13 or 15, but that it was set for exactly > 14 hours and 0 chalakim simply in order to have a nice, round starting > point for calculations.? Sure, you could then work backwards and > calculate the *exact* meridian in whose mean solar time that the molad > would have been accurate for in some given year, but I think that's > somewhat beside the point. And then someone decided to mess up the simplicity of that calculation by teaching us to start our calculations a year earlier at BaHaRaD... -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 24 13:06:02 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:06:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 08:02:09PM +0200, David Cohen via Avodah wrote: > As far as my main point, I share your objection to the assumption that the > calendar moladot were intended to be referring to Jerusalem mean time. I > just don't think they were intended to be referring to the exact mean time > of any deliberately selected meridian, but rather that the determining > factor was having the very first molad come out exactly on the hour. Ah, a fourth option. Quoting the first three from my previous post: > 1- Explain it is okay for the time of the molad to be 15-22 min off in the > days of chazal, and stick to the common belief that the time is > Y-m local. > 2- Use for the meridian where the local clock is 15 min 22 sec later, > so the minimum error (164bce) is zero. That's 4 deg 7 min east of > Yerushalayim, which is about 1/3 of the way to Bavel. > 3- Use the meridian where the local clock is 22 min 25 sec later, so > that the error between astronomy and the *time* of the halachic > molad was zeros at the end of Chazal's day. And now: 4- Use the meridian that gives the first Molad an even 8am the Friday Adam was created. (Note for third parties: Molad Baharad [meaning Yom Shini, 5 hours and 204 chalaqim] is the year before, the Molad for a hypothetical Tishrei of year 1, on the Monday of a year 0. Which makes the math easier, since you don't have to subtract anything from the year number to start calculating. but it's a molad that if Bereishis 1 is literal days, couldn't have happened -- no earth or moon yet. thus the other name: "Molad Tohu", the molad during Bereishis 1:2.) Takeh, that is very telling. Given that the first Molad is almost certainly back-calculated, and it's unlikely R Yosi ben Chalafta got every question and machloqes about dating and years historically correct. (As I've said before, "shenas 5781 leminyan she'anu monim kan" doesn't make an iqar emunah that we are monim correctly over here, and in fact may imply we are conceding we aren't sure.) If I had confidence it were historically accurate, I could equally say: the round number may imply HQBH picked that meridian when Creating. And then there would be a significance to the meridian even with your core theory. (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) > There's a wide range, spanning 15 degrees of longitude, over which rounding > that first molad to the nearest hour would get you the same result (14 > hours into Friday), and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at > the time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly what > meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the purpose of the > calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to know if we want to translate > the molad into an actual time that we can point to on our watches and say > "the molad is.... now." ... The point of Mevorkhim haChodesh (a/k/a Hahrazat haHodesh) and making sure to be aware of the time of the molad when doing so is to commemorate Qiddush haChodesh by the Sanhedrin. So, however the Sanhedrin referred to the molad when setting up the rules for dechiyot when they switched us to al pi cheshbon would serve the purpose. Any convention would do; but better the one they did. (The Magein Avraham says this is why we're standing, like beis din accepting eidim. Except, RAEiger asks, they /didn't/ stand for eidus for RCh! It's possible we're standing like the eidim, declaring the time of the future RCh as a commemoration of everyone in the room saying "MeQudash! MeQudash!") I was arguing that R Hillel and his beis din would likely use some contemporary time when setting up the calendar. So as to keep the lede on top, I replied first about the *time* of the molad. Jumping to RDC talking about the *interval*: > The length of the mean synodic month (expressed in mean solar days***) is > decreasing *very* slowly, such that it takes about 10,000 years to decrease > by an entire chelek... Which does mean that the most accurate time for the molad interval is less than rounding error. It was but one factor out of what I thought was a three-way "coincidence" that commended looking for the "right" meridian in the days of R Hillel's beis din. The fact that it was their time is much more significant (although less "coincidental"). And it makes sense to announce the time at a meridian just around the middle of where Jews then lived. Might even be what the Rambam means, when he talks about the region eidim may come from. Even if eidim weren't actually going to try arriving from Bavel (and on time?!). The Rambam sticks in my craw still. You can dismiss the significance of the "most accurate molad interval" third of the "coincidence" without changing much of my argument. Which is why I wanted to separate it out of the conversation of what clock the molad *time* is from the topic of the accuracy of the molad *interval*. 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 zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 14:55:25 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 17:55:25 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> Message-ID: On 23/12/20 4:27 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > c- it is also the era when the*interval* between molads ("molad" > definition #1) was correct to the average time between astronomical > real new moons was within a cheileq. It's *still* within a chelek. It's only 0.5 seconds off now, almost 2000 years later. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 13:21:57 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 16:21:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Le'ilui Nishmas an Infant Message-ID: RMB: Second issue, if someone didn't inspire others to do the mitzvah in > question, how can that mitzvah be added to their cheshbon. And I don't > mean that they in effect inspired, I mean chose to inspire. After all, > what's the sekhar in just happening to be a cause, no different than a > falling rock could be a cause?...How do we satisfy straightforward notions > of Dayan haEmes with these things? I suggested: ZL (Avodah V38 #112): It seems that the concept for one's ] is that Hashem > gave people the power to gift each > other, or to assign a sharing of the merits they gain to whomever they > please. Just as it is in olam hezeh. What is the justice that I should > gain > wealth by my shver gifting me, just because I married his daughter? > Not that I have a mekor for any of this. Maybe we can relate it to the > concept of a kinyan to B through the han'a'a that A get's from B' accepting > the item from him. (The niftar's neshamah is surely choosing to grant the > learner the hana'a of accepting the learner's gift to it. In exchange of > that hana'a to the learner, that neshama gains the merit of the learning.) But RMB dismissed that with: > > RMB: > >> Yes. But we're talking about how the RBSO could be Just. I would prefer > >> getting to a point of "I really don't know" than embracing theories > >> that don't seem fair. It's theology. "I don't know" is a perfectly fine > >> answer; we shouldn't insist we /can/ understand it all and settle for > >> compromises.... And I agreed, but called attention to how this relates to the original issue: ZL > True. But it is only a dilemma deserving an ''I don't know' response if you > accept the premises that the practice of saying kaddish in such a situation > is valid, somehow ... RMB: Which situations? ZL: I meant situations such as an infant's petira, and the application to it of the le'i'ui nishmas concept. Or situations such as when ''[others doing a mitzvah ''on someone's behalf''] when that someone ''didn't inspire the others to do the mitzvah in question,'' where the question arises over the fairness of how that mitzvah can be added to their cheshbon. So I wrote that this is only a dilemma if such practices, particularly with such a kavana, were attributable to minhag Yisrael/bnei neviim heim. RMB replied: RMB: Qaddish for someone who you don't owe in that sort of way doesn't > actually have a long tradition. I wouldn't assume it qualifies as minhag Yisrael. Me: I'm not informed about the minhag status of Kaddish for an infant, or learning something like mishnayos for a stranger. Nor of the history of doing these things with the intent of 'e'ilui nafsham. If such practice, and certainly if the attribution of ilui nefesh powers to the practice does not qualify as a minhag, then that would tend to weaken the need for an explanation of ''I don't know'' for why we are making such an attribution. RMB concluded: But I think that regardless of whether a person can get > zekhus for a > mitzvah done, rather than for their role in causing that mitzvah to be > done, if the emotions of the moment can cause someone to say Qaddish > with kavvanah, why not say it? Fine, L'maa'aseh of reciting the Kaddish. But the original issue was the theological one of how to defend applying the concept of le'ilui nishmas in such situations. Zvi Lampel - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Rabindranath Tagore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Thu Dec 24 16:00:39 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 19:00:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" Message-ID: The explanation I posted as to why Yosef asked particularly about whether Yaakov, and not Yitzchak, was still alive (namely, Yosef feared that the reason Yaakov did not demand the brothers return Joseph to him, was either that Yaakov also thought that Yosef deserved golus, or that Yaakov was no longer alive) does not seem to be gaining any traction among the discussants. Too bad, I really think it's pashut peshat. As I posted back in 2005 (V. 16, #072), I later came across the same peshat given by R.Shmuel Shraga Feigenson (in his work, "HaSh'mattas Mi-HaYerushalmi, printed in the back of our Yerushalmi masechta Brachos), which closes by wondering why none of the "ba'aley ha-peshat" have suggested it! I then found out that R. Yoel ben Nun also came up with. And last year, I was at a drasha where R. Doniel Neustadt also said he came up with it. Besides the evidence that I brought for it, I just thought of another factor pointing to it: Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but Yosef! As I originally noted, Bereishis Rabbah (84:13) states that when Yaakov Avinu contemplated his sending Yosef out to his brothers, "his innards tore themselves [to pieces] (mis-chas'chin). It depicts Yaakov as saying, "You knew that your brothers hate you, yet you said "henneni"!--which in its literal sense would indicate that Yaakov ultimately knew, or at least suspected, that his sons were responsible for Yosef's disappearance. He likely found his behavior inexplicable, while the explanation Yosef feared was that his father set him up to be ''taken care of'' by his brothers. Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Thu Dec 24 15:12:03 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:12:03 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> References: <20201223212705.GH4286@aishdas.org> <20201224210602.GB7728@aishdas.org> Message-ID: <68f8eec3-6dfe-8ba4-e404-a27c4706f6db@sero.name> On 24/12/20 4:06 pm, Micha Berger via Avodah wrote: > (Maybe even it points to the meridian of Gan Eden, if it was on earth.) Shu"t Bnei Tzion (R David Shapiro, Y'm, 1930) cites a medrash that the sun was created directly over Gan Eden, and that the sun was created at 9am in EY. Therefore, he says, Gan Eden is 90 deg east of EY. And presumably on the equator, though he doesn't explicitly say so; that spot is now underwater. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From llevine at stevens.edu Fri Dec 25 05:19:04 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 13:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Insights Into Today's Fast Message-ID: Please see Teveth I The Tenth of Teveth-The Wanderdoom (Galuth) of the Jewish People and its Significance (Collected Writings II) YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zvilampel at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 08:01:22 2020 From: zvilampel at gmail.com (Zvi Lampel) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 11:01:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] "Ha'od Avi Chai?" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I wrote: > > Reuvain was not present when Yosef was sold. Why not? Because it was his > turn in the rotation to be meshameish Yaakov. But Yosef was also with > Yaakov! It seems that although all the other brothers took turns being > meshameish Yaakov, Yosef's role was to always stay and study with him. > (Likely adding to the brothers' concerns). > > So now, in addition to the strangeness of Yaakov sending Yosef out to see > the welfare of his brothers (who what, needed Yosef's protection?) is the > strangeness that all of a sudden, Yaakov sends out to them not Reuvain, but > Yosef! > My mistake. True, Reuvain was with Yaakov, not the brothers, at the time of the sale. But he was with the brothers, not Yaakov, at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to them. Nevertheless, since they took turns being meshameish Yaakov, one of the other brothers was with Yaakov together with Yosef at the time Yaakov sent Yosef to the rest. So the main point, the rhetorical question, stands: Why didn't Yaakov send whoever was with him, rather than Yosef? Zvi Lampel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michaelpoppers at gmail.com Fri Dec 25 09:56:59 2020 From: michaelpoppers at gmail.com (Michael Poppers) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 12:56:59 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? Message-ID: In Avodah V38n112, RAMiller wrote: > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the eglah arufah. > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea came from Paro. > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > Comments? (As I briefly noted to RAM last night, I had the same Q this week while doing ShMOT.) >From the earlier *p'suqim*, one would have said that Par'oh sent the *agalos*, but RaShY explained in 45:27 as he did because the *pasuq* now says Yosef sent the* agalos*, hence "agalos" in this *pasuq* cannot mean what it meant when Par'oh was the power behind the dispatch of wagons. RaShY (as he often did) may have been following Onqelos -- the *targum* for the previous instances of the word was "agalan" but, in 45:27, is "eglasa". P.S. From MG.AlHaTorah.ORG I see Medrash Rabbah explaining that the wagons sent by Par'oh never reached Ya'aqov...; and Mizrachi noting this isn't the first time "vayar" actually means "vayishma" (such that our attention moves from the wagons to what Ya'aqov's sons were telling him...). Also, FWIW, Sifsei Chachamim treats "agalos" as the *k'siv* for the *q'ri* of "eglos". Best wishes for a gut'n Shabbes/Shabbas Shalom! and all the best from *Michael Poppers* * Elizabeth, NJ, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 18:47:57 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2020 21:47:57 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? Message-ID: Since beginning Shnayim Mikra V'Echad Targum this past June, I've written a few times about how it has given me insights into Aramaic and Hebrew. But I must also stress how much Chumash I've learned! Forcing myself to enunciate every single word has made me notice things that I never noticed when simply "reading" (or even studying) the parsha. Today's word (it's actually a place name) is spelled Resh Ayin Mem Samech Samech. When finishing up the parsha before minyan this morning, I noticed in Bereshis 47:11 that both the Ayin and Mem were spelled with a Sh'va. My Simanim Tanach confirmed my guess that the Mem was a Sh'va Na, so the name should be read Ra-m'-ses. This surprised me. I'm used to a different pronunciation. The Haggada quotes Shemos 1:11, where the same five letters appear with a Patach under the Ayin: Ra-am-ses. I was surprised to find that these are two distinct places, at least according to Ibn Ezra on Shmos 1:11, who points out the spelling difference and adds, "ainenu makom Yisrael - it's not the place of Israel," which I take to mean that this storage city was a different place than where Yaakov and his family lived. This is supported by the fact that this place name occurs in exactly three other places in Tanach: In Parshas Bo (12:37) and in Parshas Mas'ay (33:3, 33:5), all of which are vowelled like in Vayigash. Note the context: Those last three pesukim all mention our starting point when we left Mitzrayim, so it makes perfect sense that it is the same place as where Yaakov and the family lived. The storage city of Parshas Shemos happens to have the same five consonants, but there's no need for it to be the same place. Sifsei Chachamim in Parshas Bo explicitly says that the Ram'ses in Bo is the same place as the Ram'ses in Vayigash (though I admit that he does not say that the Raamses of Parshas Shmos is elsewhere). Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan's view on this (in The Living Torah) is unclear to me. In Parshas Shemos he says that the same area had a different name in Parshas Vayigash. But his notes in both places try to inform us of where it is located, with different suggestions in each place. And in Parshas Bo, he says that the Rameses of Bo is distinct from the Ra'amses in Parshas Shmos. (In Parshas Mas'ay he uses two different spellings which were probably intended to be the same as in Parshas Bo.) Frankly, all of the above is probably old news (a/k/a not news at all) to most of you. The translators have known all this all along, and I simply didn't notice. "Raamses" appears in Parshas Shemos, and "Rameses" in all four other pesukim, as translated by: JPS 1917 version (in the Hertz Chumash) and RSR Hirsch (in Isaac Levy's English version) and Judaica Press (at Chabad.org) and ArtScroll (in their Tanach) (and, lehavdil, the King James Version). The translations of Isaac Leeser and the Koren Tanach are slightly different than the above, but (like everyone above) they use one spelling in Parshas Shemos, and a different spelling for the other four. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 06:47:22 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 09:47:22 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Rameses or Raamses? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rameses is the country; Raamses is the city. I assume this decision was made by the same sort of person who thought it was a good idea to name two children in the same family DeShawn and DeShone. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 07:17:02 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 10:17:02 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? Message-ID: . R' David Cohen wrote: > ... and I doubt that it particularly interested anybody at the > time the calendar molad was established to figure out exactly > what meridian it would be precisely accurate for. For the > purpose of the calendar, it doesn't matter. We only need to > know if we want to translate the molad into an actual time that > we can point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now." > But the only reason we'd have any interest in doing that is if > we're using the calendar molad to determine our window of time > for kiddush levana, and I think that the practice of doing that > came long after it was established for the purpose of the calendar. For us, today, yes, I agree that Kiddush Levana is the *main* reason we would want the ability to 'point to on our watches and say "the molad is.... now."' More explicitly, this would allow us to know the exact window during which Kiddush Levana may be said. There is another situation where we would want that level of precision nowadays (but I concede that it is much less important because errors would not involve a bracha levatala). Namely: Suppose the molad is expected sometime on Shabbos day. For the sake of illustration, let's say 3 PM Shabbos afternoon. But for us who are further west, the molad will occur at some point in the morning. When Rosh Chodesh is announced in shul, the gabbai will need to choose between "The Molad will be at 3 PM today" or "The Molad WAS at 3 PM today", and only by knowing the exact meridians involved will he know which text to use. (As I said above, I concede this to be non-critical, but that doesn't mean it is devoid of relevance.) But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had not yet occurred. Similarly, if the molad is calculated to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Bavel meridian, and someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 6:55 local time, then he can be believed, because in Bavel it is already after 7:00. Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From llevine at stevens.edu Sun Dec 27 07:44:58 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 15:44:58 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] "I Can Die Now" Message-ID: The following is from the sefer Rav Schwab on Chumash. Bereishis 46:30 ??????????? ??????????? ??????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????? ????? ????????? ???? And Yisrael said to Yosef, "Now I can die; after I have seen your face that you are still alive." Regarding this pasuk, I heard a beautiful explanation from my rebbi, Harav Shlomo Breuer, in Frankfurt. When Yaakov Avinu finally met his beloved son Yosef in Egypt after twenty-two years, during which period he thought that Yosef had died, the Torah, in describing their first meeting, tells us (Bereishis 46:29): -He fell on his neck, and he continued to cry on his neck. Rashi (ibid.), quoting Chazal, explains that it was only Yosef who hugged and kissed his father, -but Yaakov, at that exalted moment-instead of embracing his beloved son-was saying Krias Shema. And then Yaakov speaks (ibid. 46:30): "Now I can die; after I have seen your face." To explain this remarkable Chazal, Rav Breuer said as follows: During the twenty-two years when Yaakov Avinu, dressed in sackcloth, mourned and cried over what he thought was the loss of his beloved son Yosef, his life was not worth much to him. Like the other Avos, Yaakov kept all the mitzvos before they were given, including the daily saying of Krias Shema. And when he said the words ????????????? ???? ??????? ?????????? ???????????????? ?????????????????? ????????????????, it was not very difficult for him to offer his life for Hakadosh Baruch Hu. In this state, he would not be giving up very much, as life was almost worthless to him. However, after seeing that Yosef was not only alive, but wearing the Egyptian crown on his head, surrounded by the trappings of royalty, Yaakov's life took on new meaning. Now that he was reunited with his beloved son, his life had become precious again. And it was precisely at that exalted moment, when his life had taken on such great value, that he offered to give it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu if the need arose. Now he was really offering his most precious possession: his life in its most exalted state! It was therefore necessary for him to recite Krias Shema at that moment, and say - I am prepared to offer everything- including my very precious life-for Hakadosh Baruch Hu, if the need arises. For the record, Rav Schwab is referring to Rabbiner Dr. Shlomo Zalman Breuer, zt"l, RSRH's son-in-law and successor. YL YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From akivagmiller at gmail.com Sun Dec 27 15:03:47 2020 From: akivagmiller at gmail.com (Akiva Miller) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:03:47 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 Message-ID: . R' Yitzchok Levine wrote: > I have never understood this custom. The hours between 6 and 7 PM > differ depending upon where one is in the world, so if Mars is > controlling the world between 6 and 7 pm in EY, it seems to me that it > is not controlling the world in Brooklyn between 6 and 7 pm where I live. I don't understand it either, and this post is to explain why I'm not satisfied with the answers I've heard. RYL quoted an unnamed person who wrote: > In addition to your question, if they really cared about when Mars was > ascendent, the time would change by one hour when we move the clock. > But by Chasidim, it remains 6:00 and 7:00. Therefore, they do not really > care about where Mars is. QED. And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert > This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and > kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. > ... > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value. > Will we get a scientist to come here and tell us there is no scientific > proof that tefillin shel rosh cause goyim to be scared of Jews? Sounds > like a task for a psychologist. If this were a matter of halacha, the > Rebbe would not waive it! > ... > Our MO community is fixated on science, which has very little to do with > many of our foundational myths. But in Judaism that's of minor concern, > as Halacha trumps all. > ... > By the way Chabad also observes this custom, and their last leader, > Rabbi MM Schneerson, not only studied science in an academic setting > but had an interest in astronomy, since his teen years, but he knew > science lechud and Yahadus lechud. I can't speak for anyone else, but I think that the above writers don't grasp my problem with this practice. My questions aren't because this practice is inconsistent with science. It's because this practice seems inconsistent with *Torah*! I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year, whether the last time was 12 months ago or 13. And it really does happen, despite science's inability to see it, measure it, or verify it in any manner.( And if you don't like how I phrased that, then please cut me some slack and replace it with whatever words you'd prefer, cuz you DO know what I'm talking about.) Each time I wake up, I wash my hands in a very particular way. Chazal tell me there's a ruach ra on my hands, and even though science can't see it, I can be cleansed of it if I follow specific rules. The Torah gave us halachos about Kli Rishon, Kli Sheni, and Kli Shlishi. And we follow those halachos even though a scientist understands heat very differently, and a chef defines cooking very differently. Halacha doesn't have to follow science, but it does have to follow its own internal logic; it follows its own rules. Getting back to avoiding Kiddush between 6 PM and 7 PM, I accept that this is totally independent of any scientific observations of where Mars actually appears. And I can accept that it *is* something to be careful about, al pi nistar. But shouldn't the implementation of this carefulness be based on Torah concepts? For example: For purposes of Tal Umatar (in chutz laaretz) and for Birkas Hachama, halacha accepts the idea of a solar year that lasts 365 1/4 days. Further, for practical purposes, halacha accepts a rotation of 365-, 365- 365- and 366-day years. And those years do not overlap precisely with the rotation of the Gregorian calendar, which is why we sometimes begin Tal Umatar on Dec 4 and sometimes on Dec 5. And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow down to each state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even when daylight time is in effect?!?! We started Tal Umatar in the 1800s on Dec 3/4, and this changed to Dec 4/5 because there was no Feb 29 1900. So too, if one avoids kiddush during a certain hour each week, then that cycle ought to repeat every 168 hours, even if one's state chooses to observe daylight time. In other words, avoid kiddush between 7 and 8 in the summer. This has nothing to do with choosing science over Torah! It is to be consistent within Torah! Similarly: It seems to me that if the avoidance of Kiddush begins at the same moment in Boston, New York, and Cleveland, this is a capitulation and surrender to the secular standards. In each location, the no-kiddush hour might begin six standard hours after Chatzos Hayom, or perhaps at sunset, or perhaps at tzeis. But does it really make sense that this hour would be observed at different times in England and in France, simply because their governments choose to be in different time zones? (Note: Throughout this post, I've been working under the presumption that Mars' spiritual effects on the earth are similar to the sun's physical effects. That is, each day, their effects begin on the western edge of the Date Line (whatever and wherever that might be). And then, as the earth rotates below, different parts of the earth come under its influence - first Asia, then Europe and Africa, and so on. But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where the Molad is calculated from). I have no idea which way Mars works. All I'm suggesting is that it might be worth looking into.) Akiva Miller -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Sun Dec 27 16:38:16 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:38:16 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Where is the Molad announced for? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2c2d31f0-c608-bf91-a050-fdd193e93599@sero.name> On 27/12/20 10:17 am, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > > But the *real* question on the table isn't whether or not *we* should > care which meridian the molad is based on. Rather, when Rosh Chodesh was > declared by the Beis Din after interrogating the witnesses, did that > Beis Din care about such things? It is obvious to me that they must have > cared, and known, and included these calculations in the verification of > the testimony of the witnesses. The logic is quite simple: Suppose the > molad is calculated?to be at 7:00 PM, based on the Yerushalayim > meridian. If someone says he saw it in Yerushalayim at 7:05 local time, > he can be believed. But if he claims to have seen it in Bavel at 7:05 > local time, he should not be believed, because the calculated molad had > not yet occurred. This doesn't work, because the calculated "molad" is the conjunction of the *average* moon with the *average* sun, both of which are imaginary bodies. When witnesses come they report having seen the *actual* moon, which may well have already had its conjunction, and be visible *before* the average moon's conjunction. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From zev at sero.name Mon Dec 28 07:25:07 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 10:25:07 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/12/20 6:03 pm, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And we certainly aren't so subservient to their calendar that we would > skip a leap year in 1900 or in 2100, which is why there is a slight > drift over the centuries, for which days of December are the switchover. Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect when we adopted this practice. The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), and we say birkas hachama whenever March 26 is on a Wednesday in the year after a leap year. Easy and simple. Then the goyim went and switched the calendar on us and made it not so simple. Almost every century we have to adjust those dates to keep up. But had they changed their calendar *before* we decided to rely on it, we'd probably have decided to rely on the new and improved calendar instead. > So why on earth does this practice (about kiddush between 6 and 7) bow > down to each?state government's policy on how to set one's clock? Even > when daylight time is in effect?!?! The answer is that it doesn't. I don't know who claimed that people ignore daylight savings time (i.e. keep 6 to 7 DST in the summer, which is "really" 5 to 6), and I don't believe it. I do believe -- indeed I know -- that there are many who ignore the adjustment for railroad time, but that is simply out of ignorance of the metzius, and when the truth is explained to them they change their practice. > But maybe that's *not* how Mars works; maybe Mars affects the entire > earth at the same time, beginning at some point and lasting for 60 > minutes. If so, then we need to ask "From six to seven o'clock *where*?" > and adjust accordingly (very similar to the current thread about where > the Molad is calculated from). This is not viable, because the Gemara describe these hours in Bavel, and doesn't say that in EY they're different, and the Maharil in Europe uses them unadjusted. [Quoting a post I never saw:] > Those who are followers of the Besht, etc accept this at face value This has nothing to do with chassidus or the Baal Shem Tov -- it's minhag Ashkenaz as recorded by the Maharil, and expanded on by the Magen Avraham and the Machtzis Hashekel, none of whom were chassidim. If most non-chassidim have stopped practicing it, that needs to be explained. But I find it curious that, at least in my experience, people who do practice it think of it as a negative, *not* to make kidush during the Mars hour, and therefore usually delay kidush till after that hour, whereas the original source, the Maharil, expresses it as a positive, *to* make kidush during the Jupiter hour, *before* the Mars hour. Also, it seems to me that the Maharil's language (although I've never seen it inside, but only as quoted by others) seems to imply that he thought it worked by sha'os z'manios, i.e. that Mars always rules the "hour" after sunset", and therefore the minhag is to accept Shabbos early and make sure to make kidush before sunset. But as far as I know everyone who practices this says it works by sha'os hashavos, just like molad zaken does. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 13:36:00 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 16:36:00 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228213600.GC19928@aishdas.org> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:25:07AM -0500, Zev Sero via Avodah wrote: > Actually we probably would, if the Gregorian adjustment had been in effect > when we adopted this practice. > The reason we do it this way, even though we have always known it to be > imprecise, is probably because it's easy to keep track of via the Goyishe > calendar. We switch on Nov 23 (or 24 if it's going to be a leap year -- and > remember that at that time the year didn't change until *after* February), ... If this were so, wouldn't it be even easier to just make it a consistent Nov 23, rather than knowing that later that year would be a leap day? Not that it actually was the same year by around Hillel and Shammai's day. The New Year in Rome was moved from a year that ended on Teminalia (23 Feb) back in a time when Rome had 10 fixed months, leap months, and a mess that contemporary theories disagree about the details of. By the time we get to the Julian calendar, February was the following Julian year from whenever we started saying vesein tal umatar. Also, tequfas Shemu'el was named for a resident of Nahardaa and we are talking about its use for when people in Bavel should change the nusach. So, the relevant local non-Jews were using the Zoroastrian calendar, not the Julian one. During Shemu'el's lifetime or so, Arashir I, the founder of the Sasanian Empire, took the year from 360 days, 30 per month, to a 365 day year by adding 5 extra Gatha days not in any month. No connection to leap days. I think it's just that an error of 3 days or so every 400 years was good enough for both the Romans and Shemuel. Common cause, rather than one copying the other. Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger The mind is a wonderful organ http://www.aishdas.org/asp for justifying decisions Author: Widen Your Tent the heart already reached. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF From llevine at stevens.edu Mon Dec 28 11:26:41 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 19:26:41 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag Message-ID: Please see https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1342153328709545985.html [https://threadreaderapp.com/images/screenshots/thread/1342153328709545985.jpg] Thread by @Adderabbi on Thread Reader App Thread by @Adderabbi: Discussions of Nittel Nacht often begin with a dichotomy: Hasidim observe the custom of not learning, whereas Litvaks disregard this and learn. But neither of these groups was the first to obs...? threadreaderapp.com YL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From micha at aishdas.org Mon Dec 28 11:57:35 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 14:57:35 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Vizhnitz Rebbe Asks Chasidim To Make Kiddush This Shabbos Between 6 And 7 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201228195732.GA19928@aishdas.org> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 06:03:47PM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > And then he quoted Reb Zalman Alpert: >> This has nothing to do with science. It's in the realm of Aggada and >> kabbala which has no relation to logical scientific facts. ... > I am a person who believes that each year, on Shavuos, there is a hashpaah > from Above that enables us to accept the Torah yet again. And this happens > every year, on schedule, whether it happens to be the 5th 6th or 7th of > Sivan. And it happens on schedule every year... Do you believe that when we speak of itzumo shel yom mekhapeir this includes someone who dosn't believe in Yom Kippur and its power of kapparah? Seems to be a parallel to what you're discussing about Shavuos. There are other alternatives to science than just asserting metaphysical forces. Even as a derekh in Qabbalah, eg the Ramchal's metaphoric approach. What can make Shavuos a day of hashpa'ah for qabalas haTorah need not be physics or even something "out there", but rather in our relationship to the date. Halakhah in general seems to relate more to things as we relate to them than to abstract scientific facts about the thing in itself. Like when posqim choose to ignore DNA testing that would mean someone is a mamzer. DNA testing is about facts about objects, not relationship to them. We don't relate to microscopic bugs, or to DNA. And similarly, our deciding a day is Shavuos can be the metaphysics that makes Shavuos powerful. Which would be undrstandable to a reationalist, and yet still be consistent with approaches to Qabbalah like R Chaim Volozhiner's. (Like in Nefesh haChaim 1:6, where he writes that the human was created last, "beri'ah nifla'a koachme'seif lekhol hamachanos" that we alone are where all the olamos touch and connect, and actions in one world can have the ability to move events in another only through the connection that is Adam. (Which is his definition of "tzelem Elokim", where "Elokim" is taken to mean "Master of all the Kochos".) Which could also be true for defining 6pm Friday. I don't believe that, since it's the railroads, and not the din, that standadized the clock. I more want to change the language of the dialog from either physics or metaphysics, but both presuming to be objective. The Torah focuses more on the subjective world than our attempts to identify and understand an objective one (or: ones). 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 llevine at stevens.edu Tue Dec 29 07:17:38 2020 From: llevine at stevens.edu (Prof. L. Levine) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 15:17:38 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro Message-ID: One can listen to a talk on this subject at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBuaVoA9tlg [https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVF.9XRlDiI%2bcrjgdX1U3%2f4Jmg&pid=Api] Christmas Eve: Is it a Time for Torah Study? || Dr. Marc Shapiro www.youtube.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From zev at sero.name Tue Dec 29 10:06:45 2020 From: zev at sero.name (Zev Sero) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 13:06:45 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Nittel Nacht Is An Old Ashkenaz Minhag In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A few years ago I saw an article that made a fairly convincing case that all the classic Nittel minhagim originally started among German Xians in the 16th century, and the Jews picked it up from them. Apparently the German "Santa" of that time was far from the jolly figure we're familiar with, and the Xian kids were terrified of him, and spread that terror to their Jewish playmates. -- Zev Sero Wishing everyone a *healthy* and happy 5781 zev at sero.name "May this year and its curses end May a new year and its blessings begin" From ydamyb at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 06:11:10 2020 From: ydamyb at gmail.com (Akiva Blum) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:11:10 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] Who sent the wagons? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:41 PM Akiva Miller via Avodah < avodah at lists.aishdas.org> wrote: > . > Bereshis 45:27 tells us that Yaakov saw the agalos (wagons) that Yosef had > sent. Rashi there explains that Yosef was sending a coded message, by way > of a pun, because when Yosef left Yaakov, they had been learning about the > eglah arufah. > > But actually, in Bereshis 45:19, Paro commanded Yosef to tell his brothers > to take wagons. it was not Yosef's idea to send wagons at all. The idea > came from Paro. > > Technically, Yosef DID tell his brothers to take wagons, but my point is > that it wasn't Yosef's idea. It seems that in order to send this message to > Yaakov, Hashem inspired Paro to command Yosef about the wagons. > My understanding is that there was no coded message. He sent a direct message, what were they learning last. That is why the possuk says, the wagons that Yosef sent. Akiva Blum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eliturkel at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 13:21:41 2020 From: eliturkel at gmail.com (Eli Turkel) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2020 23:21:41 +0200 Subject: [Avodah] mechiras yosef Message-ID: The midrash partially blames Yaakov for the whole story with Yosef, because he gave Yosef the ketonet pasim above what the other brothers got we went down into Egypt. I recently heard a question from Rav Medan that he doesn't understand the complaint. Yosef alone among the brothers has no mother. Thus, Jacob had to act as both father and mother to Yosef. Thus, the other brothers got more from their mothers and Yaakov was only making up for the lack of a mother )Binyamin was too young to figure in any of this), Similarly why should the brothers feel jealous of Yosef for receiving the coat and not think that an orphan (from the mother) deserves a little more attention Any answers? -- Eli Turkel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:30 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:30 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] Priorities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Commercial customs often (but not always) supersede halachic default positions. Thought question-Is halachic default position the ratzon hashem (What HKB"H prefers of us)or simply provided so society can function? Bonus-How does this relate to priorities for chiyuvim for the amud(leading services)? KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, 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 Segalco.com Tue Dec 29 22:48:03 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 06:48:03 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech Message-ID: My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, which could yield further insights into the ratzon hashem. (See what happened with alphago https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo .) 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 Dec 30 12:58:39 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 06:48:03AM +0000, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote: > My guess is the Brisker derech is not the final approach to Talmudic > analysis. (For me, it's too Boolean in trying to explain the underlying > halachic data.) I've been thinking that a more multivariate approach > will eventually be constructed; perhaps with some assistance from AI, ... I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. But there already is a derivative of Brisker Derekh that is less binary. It is common to focus on the difference between Brisk and Telzhe with the truism that "In Brisk they ask 'Vus?'; in Telzhe they ask 'Fahr vus?'" In Brisk, halakhah is one's first principles. You use halakhah to explain the world, and would never use the world to explain halakhah. So, to a stereotypical Brisker, baalus is defined by the set of halakhos of qinyan, geneivah, yerushah, han'ah and issur hana'ah, etc... Very different than the beginning of Shaarei Yosher shaar 5. R Shimon says that property is a concept inherent in the human condition. The halakhos of baalus are about navigating that pre-existing concept in a holy way. But there is a second difference... Hitztarfus. Brisk focuses on chaqiros and tzevei dinim, and ways of dividing up the din or shitos by finding which one factor drives each position. And so much of Brisker Derekh is about tools for identifying those factors. But R Shimon also discusses halakhos that emerge from the hitztarfus, the convergance of factors. See RYGB's examples at the tail of : shi'abud haguf (personal lien) and acharekha. Between the added ability to inspire by letting halakhah tie to experience and the zeitgeist's move away from reductionism there are grounds for giving more attention to this alternative. PS: I called R Shimon's derekh a derivative of Brisker Derekh because when R Shimon got to Volozhin, he attached himself to a chaburah run by this bachur 6 years older than him that was generating so much excitement. And only later became closed to the Netziv. So, R' Shimon learned Brisker derekh early on -- early for both him and the derekh. I see R Shimon's derekh as taking what he learned about lomdus from the future R Chaim, and translating it from the worldview RYBS depicts in Ish haHalakhah into that more at home in Mussar and Mussar-derived hashkafos like that of Telzh. Where Da'as (as Telzhe shaped the word) and thus "Fahr vus?" play a central role. 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 Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 10:56:06 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2020 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] hinnini muchan umzuman Message-ID: I seem to recall a story of a gadol who was so opposed to saying hinnini muchan umzuman that when someone asked to borrow his lulav and started to say this, he took the lulav back. Does this sound familiar? Any details appreciated Kt Joel rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JRich at Segalco.com Wed Dec 30 23:36:40 2020 From: JRich at Segalco.com (Rich, Joel) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 07:36:40 +0000 Subject: [Avodah] the Brisker derech In-Reply-To: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> References: <20201230205839.GF11129@aishdas.org> Message-ID: I don't know about AI... AI today requires training data sets, and doesn't explain how a new example is more like one side of the "learned" distinction or the other. So, if you have a data set but you can't articulate how to divide it into categories (eg which of these are "a"s in various fonts) what is called AI today could implement many such categorizations. You can come up with more examples of an existing distinction, or perform different behaviors by categorizing the current situation is on this side or that of a distinction. But you still don't get an explanation of that pattern. I'm not sure how its usable in this context. ------------------------------------ AIUI that's a general AI issue that's being worked on-getting AI to explain itself (in the alphago case what made it "think" of new strategies KT Joel Rich THIS MESSAGE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE. IT MAY CONTAIN PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION THAT IS EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE. Dissemination, distribution or copying of this message by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying: "Received in error" and delete the message. Thank you. From larry62341 at optonline.net Thu Dec 31 03:26:50 2020 From: larry62341 at optonline.net (Prof. Levine) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:26:50 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] The Real Story of XMAS and New Years Message-ID: <0C.85.01309.7A5BDEF5@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> Listen to the talk at https://www.torahanytime.com/#/lectures?a=5768 given by Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen and learn what XMAS is really all about. This talk is an eye opener. YL Rabbi Lawrence Kelemen is a Professor of Education at Neve Yerushalayim College of Jewish Studies for Women in Jerusalem, where he lectures undergraduate and graduate students in modern and medieval philosophy. After receiving his undergraduate degree from UCLA, Rabbi Kelemen continued with his graduate studies at Harvard University, and later completed 12 years of post-graduate field research in the Middle East. Rabbi Kelemen brings to his lectures and writings his impressive academic background, as well as a myriad of life experiences, including those of a newspaper editor, skiing instructor and radio anchorman. Now an accomplished lecturer and author, Rabbi Kelemen electrifies parents, teachers , and university students across North and South America, Europe and the Middle with his wit, humor, wisdom and gifts of insight into the essence of living a meaningful life. Rabbi Kelemen is the author of Permission to Believe (1990) Permission to Receive. From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 11:45:58 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 14:45:58 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] Is it permissible to eat while walking outside through a marketplace? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20201231194558.GB21711@aishdas.org> On Tue, Dec 08, 2020 at 06:45:21AM -0500, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote: > We have our work cut out for us. Each case has to be investigated > carefully. For a long time, I had thought that the halachos of Shinui Makom > (the requirement to repeat a bracha rishona because one left the place > where he was eating) was related to society and formal dining, and > therefore might change when eating habits changed... This gives me an excuse to raise a broader question about societal change. Chazal's meals were very much centered on bread. Kind of like the standard appetizer course at many Israeli Shabbos tables. The bread served as a cross between spoon and plate -- you shovel up some food on your bread and eat. Lefes (which Jastrow renders "lefas") and liftan on pas are no longer the backbone of akhilas qeva or se'udos. We simply don't eat like that. A sandwich is one kind of meal; eating with bread no longer /defines/ a meal. And while I would be loathe to change something as major as allowing the opening hamotzi cover all the foods in a meal, I wonder if the assumptions Chazal had when stating this rule apply to how we eat a meal today. On the example of non-chassidim and gartl: > If the reason for a belt or gartel is related to being "a respectful form > of dress", then RMBluke is raising an excellent point, and it should be > okay to pray in a full-length gown, even without a belt or underwear. But > my understanding is that the requirement for a belt is *not* related to > fashion, but is specifically to make a separation between one's head and > private parts, and would apply in all times and places. The reason > non-chasidim don't wear a gartel is because the regular belt is sufficient, > and even without an actual belt a waistband can suffice. (More details at > Orach Chayim 91:2) The issue is libo ro'eh es ha'erva. (If it were the heat, a tie would work.) The AhS (se'if 4) gives a reason to put a gartl on even if you are wearing a belt. The pasuq reads "Hakhon liqras E-lokhekha Yisrael". The gemara (Shabbos 10a) gives examples of such hakhanos. The AhS brings down this gemara earlier (se'if 1) and refers to it here. Putting on a gartl has become a traditional way to prepare oneself to meet the RBSO, and even if today's fashion makes it rarely necessary for ein libo ro'eh es ha'erva, the AhS believes the practice should not be stopped. And that's from the Litvisher poseiq known for finding meqoros for justifying minhag! I would guess that in Litta, gartelach were far more common than among today's "Litvish". Tir'u baTov! -Micha -- Micha Berger What you get by achieving your goals http://www.aishdas.org/asp is not as important as Author: Widen Your Tent what you become by achieving your goals. - https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF - Henry David Thoreau From micha at aishdas.org Thu Dec 31 13:54:13 2020 From: micha at aishdas.org (Micha Berger) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 16:54:13 -0500 Subject: [Avodah] A Modern Lesson in Dan Lekaf Zekhus Message-ID: <20201231215413.GA5657@aishdas.org> >From RNSlifkin, a blog post titled "Karate Mussar". http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2020/12/karate-mussar.html Tir'u baTov! -Micha Rationalist Judaism Thursday, December 31, 2020 Karate Mussar I recently watched an amazing mussar series. Karate isn't exactly my thing. But, like many people who grew up in the 80s, I watched and loved The Karate Kid. The nice kid -- awkward, poor and scrawny Daniel Larusso -- is bullied by the mean kid; handsome, wealthy jock Johnny Lawrence. But then Daniel learns karate from wise mentor Mr. Miyagi, and defeats Johnny in the All-Valley Karate championships! It was an immensely satisfying tale for teenagers. Recently a sequel series was made, called Cobra Kai. It features the original actors -- Ralph Macchio and William Zabka -- and is thus set an astonishing thirty-four years later! But what's really incredible is what they did with the storyline. Naturally, Daniel and Johnny are training the next generation. So you'd expect that Daniel, as the hero, is training the good kid, and Johnny, as the bully, is training the bad kid. But the series flips that. Johnny is the one training the good kid, and Daniel the bad kid! But Cobra Kai goes much further. It spends most of the time presenting things from Johnny's perspective. For thirty-four years, one thing that we've known for sure is that Daniel was the good guy and Johnny was the bad guy. But the sequel flips that on its head. Sure, Johnny is no tzaddik, but he's a sympathetic character. He had a rough home life. He became a bully because he himself was bullied by his stepfather. And his version of what happened back in 1984 is very different from Daniel's version. The way he saw it, Daniel was trying to steal his girlfriend, and often provoked him. Since then, after struggling with alcohol and employment problems, Johnny is making a sincere effort to get his life back together, including training bullied kids who need self-confidence. Daniel, meanwhile, has a successful personal and professional life, and is basically a good guy, but is way too smug and vindictive, and not willing to see that Johnny might be a better person than he remembers. The mussar lesson here is powerful. First, there's the way in which we can be certain about a person for literally decades, and then turn out to be wrong. Second is how Daniel and Johnny, despite both being basically decent people, are still stuck with their childhood prejudices and are each convinced that the other is awful beyond redemption. The show portrays how each of them views everything that the other does through the lens of their experience as teenagers. Instead of being able to get along as old acquaintances, and to grow together, they keep spiraling downwards due to their conviction that the other is evil and must be taken down. This is a point that I've been trying to make in this forum for [6]several [7]months [8]now. As a non-American, I have the benefit of a certain detachedness from US politics, like the viewer of Cobra Kai. It makes it possible to see clearly how partisanship and tribalism influence people to interpret everything that the other side does in the worst possible light. I've been trying to encourage people to try to look at things from the perspective of others, but with limited effect. The main argument that I use is as follows: If many people that you otherwise regard as basically good people see things so entirely differently from you, then surely there must be some merit in their perspective, even if they are ultimately wrong? I mean, I am sympathetic to why charedim are opposed to IDF service (it's not because they think that Torah protects, it's because it fundamentally threatens their way of life) and I can even understand why the charedi Gedolim [9]banned my books. Surely if tens of millions of people view things very differently from you, including plenty of people from your own background and social circles, then one should try to understand their perspective and not condemn them as utterly foolish/ evil? If nothing that I wrote convinces you, then maybe try watching Cobra Kai. ... [Ad for supporting The Biblical Museum as well as what is now a comment dialog of 14 comments deleted.]